gha...@gmail.com said: > In any case, while I can imagine the client-side and monitoring code running > through the shim, how likely is it that Gary and Hal (and Dr Mills) PLL code > would survive being machine-translated to a non-POSIX kernel?
There are 2 interesting parts to the kernel. The important one is adjusting the clock rate, the drift. With that you can run a good NTP client which can also be a server. The other part is the PPS stuff. The critical part is to get a time stamp on the PPS signal. The kernel PLL is not required. ---------- There are 2 styles for making code run on various environments. One is to sprinkle #ifdef and blocks of code inline. The other is to make an API that covers what you need and then write an implementation of that API for each environment you are interested in. In this context, I'm willing to see how well POSIX works for that API. It would be interesting to see how much of our code runs on cygwin or something similar. If the only problem is adjusting the clock, we can probably figure out how to do that and write a wrapper. ------- The NetBSD kernel for the Raspberry Pi doesn't have the critical kernel call implemented. I haven't investigated. They ship a version of ntp classic that works. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@ntpsec.org http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
