Yo Eric! On Tue, 23 Aug 2016 19:32:55 -0400 "Eric S. Raymond" <e...@thyrsus.com> wrote:
> Hal Murray <hmur...@megapathdsl.net>:
> > We
> > should get rid of the current every-second timer unless some
> > refclock needs it. (battery power) The PPS API has an optional
> > wait/wakeup option. We should use that if available. The timer
> > stuff also covers when to transmit a packet, but we should peek
> > ahead and set the timeout on the select for as long as possible.
> > But all that should wait until after TESTFRAME so we can test it.
>
> Agreed. This has been on my long-term to-do list for some time.
Sadly, PPS with the current algorithm should bump up to sampling every
one-half second. Some even want 10 Hz or even 100 Hz.
Let us leave it on the long-term to-do list and not hash over it now.
The subject is complicated and contentious. Way too many moving parts
in a core chunk of the code to touch without TESTFRAME. I also expect
TESTFRAME will smoke out some of these issues and also have its own
different timer loop needs.
RGDS
GARY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary E. Miller Rellim 109 NW Wilmington Ave., Suite E, Bend, OR 97703
g...@rellim.com Tel:+1 541 382 8588
pgp2XECZu7CYl.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@ntpsec.org http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
