On May 2, 2007, at 12:55 PM, Paul Cadach wrote:
Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
I'd like to get your input regarding
http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=9645
The patch adds an extra span method:
int (*sync_tick)(struct zt_span *span, int is_master);
The zaptel sync master span will call it to any span (in which it is
not
NULL) at each of its ticks.
Is it better to have a call to such API every N (1000, 10000) ticks?
At least it will offload CPU processing, but still make channel driver
to be able to adapt its slave clocks according to zaptel's master
clocks.
To be clear, when zaptel detects master clock change, it will
immediately call such callback to notify channel drivers about master
change event. Of course, it should pass its own tick counter to allow
channel drivers to adapt their clocks independedly on callback call
frequency. IMHO this should offload CPU/etc. but provide the same
behavior as Tzafrir suggests.
Also, to perform card's clock source manipulation, you should collect
relatively high number of ticks to be accurate as possible, so I think
calling the callback often than one time per second is overkill.
Yes, I tend to agree with these observations. Assuming the hardware
does have support for timing adjustments such as this, 1000 times per
second of timing update is most definitely overkill.
Matthew Fredrickson
_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
