[LinuxPPS] ntp 'bugs'

[Rodolfo Giometti]

On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 12:52:12PM +0200, Udo van den Heuvel wrote:
> Rodolfo Giometti wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 11:44:33AM +0200, Udo van den Heuvel wrote:
> > 
> >> Yes and no.
> >> Your rationale is right, but the agreed patch, at this time, from the
> >> bug at https://support.ntp.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=610 is at
> >> https://support.ntp.org/bugs/attachment.cgi?id=405.
> >> There you see that there is *no* time_pps_create for the NMEA carrying
> >> serial line because we expect PPS from the PPS devcie which is tried next.
> >> Of course this can be changed!
> > 
> > I referred to this patch:
> > 
> >    http://ftp.enneenne.com/pub/misc/linuxpps/refclocks/nmea/nmea.patch
> 
> the ntp folks don't refer to that patch.
> So if we want nmea refclock to work we better update the bugzilla for ntpd.

I see.

> > Can you use this patch?
> 
> Not until I patch the kernel for the line discipline change, which I
> held off until now, waiting for 2.6.26 (which also brings us STA_NANO).

I just provied a patch against v2.6.26-rc8...

> The patch has some issues which were resolved in the patch at
> https://support.ntp.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=610.
> The structure was an issue of concern, one excessive sprintf can be
> omitted? (after the else) and what if an other implementation changes
> line discipline (or similar) like you do?

I think we have to "hide" line discipline stuff into PPS-API as
suggested before. This should solve all "implementation changes".

Ciao,

Rodolfo

-- 

GNU/Linux Solutions                  e-mail: giometti at enneenne.com
Linux Device Driver                          giometti at linux.it
Embedded Systems                     phone:  +39 349 2432127
UNIX programming                     skype:  rodolfo.giometti