On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 03:06:11PM +0400, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
>
> As I see this technology requires special dedicated server in the local
> network, thus it's unusable in most situations. But it starts working
> without any actions from the user (please fix me if I'm wrong).
Perhaps you don't have a very clear picture of how this PTP stuff
works. Even when the PHC and time stamping code is compiled in, it
does *not* start working unless the end user turns it on, via the
SIOCSHWTSTAMP and SO_TIMESTAMPING options.
See: Documentation/networking/timestamping.txt
Documentation/ptp/ptp.txt
> Thus this code enables some rarely used parts of hardware.
> After seeing several weird bugs in ethernet devices I prefer to
> keep unused/unwanted features off.
Just compiling drivers into kernel does not really change the behavior
of the hardware. The only drawback I know of is that it adds (minimal)
overhead into the packet processing paths, but that is a software
issue.
I don't mean to start a big discussion here. The question of whether
to have PHC support a compile time option should be discussed on the
netdev list (added on CC just in case).
Thanks,
Richard
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
