On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 16:46:07 +0200, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 08:03:49AM -0400, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 10:29:30 +0200, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> > > That timestamp doesn't need much resolution. It just says when the
> > > offset (in double format) was captured. Milliseconds would be fine.
> >
> > Ok. I just saw that the code uses that the timestamp and the offset to
> > calculate the time (for non-PPS sources) and it seemed desirable to get more
> > than microsecond resolution for that before it gets fed into RCL_AddSample.
> > In other words, this timestamp indirectly affects the resolution of the
> > sample fed in.
>
> It's converted to timespec and then back to double after applying the
> offset option. The resolution of the original timestamp doesn't
> impact the resolution of the offset. It is effectively handled in
> nanosecond resolution.
Just to make sure I understand, the "proper" way is to adjust the offset to
compensate for any rounding? IOW, something like what I had in my program
before I messed with chrony's code:
uint64_t sys; /* system clock unix time in ns */
uint64_t ref; /* reference clock unix time in ns */
...
/* align sys time to microseconds, adjust ref time to maintain offset */
ref -= (sys % 1000);
sys -= (sys % 1000);
/* send message to chrony */
msg->tv.tv_sec = sys / 1000000000;
msg->tv.tv_usec = (sys / 1000) % 1000000;
msg->offset = (ref - sys) / 1e9;
...
sendto(...)
This assumes that time was linear during the sys%1000 nanoseconds. That
seems reasonable but as I said, I want to make sure I understand the right
way to feed chrony via the SOCK refclock.
Thanks,
Jeff.
--
To unsubscribe email chrony-dev-requ...@chrony.tuxfamily.org with "unsubscribe"
in the subject.
For help email chrony-dev-requ...@chrony.tuxfamily.org with "help" in the
subject.
Trouble? Email listmas...@chrony.tuxfamily.org.
