On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 05:58:49PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > I don't think I understand the problem here. On the contrary, I do. > You'd have something like this: > > Master (DSA master port) Slave (switch CPU port) > > | | Tstamps known > | | to slave > | Local_sync_req | > t1 |------\ | t1 > | \-----\ | > | \-----\ | > | \----->| t2 t1, t2 > | | > | Local_sync_resp /------| t3 t1, t2, t3 > | /-----/ | > | /-----/ | > t4 |<-----/ | t1, t2, t3, t4 > | | > | | > v time v And who generates Local_sync_resp? Also, what sort of frame is it? PTP has no Sync request or response. > But you don't mean a TX timestamp at the egress of swp4 here, do you? Yes, I do. > Why would that matter? Because in order to synchronize to an external GM, you need to measure two things: 1. the (unchanging) delay from MAC to MAC 2. the (per-packet) switch residence time Thanks, Richard