On Tuesday, August 17, 2010 8:25 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> Ohtake-san, Richard's code already contains an abstraction for multiple
> ieee1588 sources, which looks like it should perfectly fit your purposes.
> I don't see room for another user interface, so please try to integrate
> into version 5 of his ptp code.
We want to implement IEEE1588 driver for Intel EG20T PCH (Topcliff) using
PTP core
according to you saying.
However, it seems PTP core module is not accepted by upstream.
How about your PTP status ?
Thanks,
---
Tomoya MORINAGA
OKI SEMICONDUCTOR CO., LTD.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Arnd Bergmann" <[email protected]>
To: "Richard Cochran" <[email protected]>
Cc: "Masayuki Ohtake" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>;
"LKML" <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 8:25 PM
Subject: Re: [MeeGo-dev] [MeeGo-Dev][PATCH] Topcliff: Update PCH_IEEE1588
driver to 2.6.35
> On Tuesday 17 August 2010, Richard Cochran wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 04:12:45PM +0900, Masayuki Ohtake wrote:
>> > Intel Topcliff IEEE1588 device driver API is developed according to
>> > Intel
>> > Tolapai 1588 device driver.
>> > Both APIs are the same.
>>
>> But what is the "Intel Tolapai 1588 device driver?"
>>
>> Is that a Linux driver?
>>
>> If so, where can I find it?
>
> I found it under
> http://downloadcenter.intel.com/Detail_Desc.aspx?agr=Y&DwnldID=17182
>
> That driver was never submitted for inclusion anywhere, so it is not
> really relevant here. The APIs are similar, but not identical, most
> importantly they use a different ioctl command base number, but also
> some of the structures are laid out slightly differently.
>
> Ohtake-san, Richard's code already contains an abstraction for multiple
> ieee1588 sources, which looks like it should perfectly fit your purposes.
> I don't see room for another user interface, so please try to integrate
> into version 5 of his ptp code.
>
> Arnd
>
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 04:46:03PM +0900, Tomoya MORINAGA wrote:
> We want to implement IEEE1588 driver for Intel EG20T PCH (Topcliff)
> using PTP core according to you saying.
That is good news.
> However, it seems PTP core module is not accepted by upstream.
> How about your PTP status ?
I posted v6 back on September 23. Based on the comments, I think the
patch set is almost good enough for mainline inclusion (at least, I
hope so).
I am just getting ready to post v7, and the kernel interface will
change a bit. I will post it before Christmas, so perhaps you can wait
a bit. You can take look at the v6 code, since the general ideas will
not change very much.
Thanks,
Richard