William Unruh wrote:
On 2019-07-19, Chris <xxx.syseng....@gfsys.co.uk> wrote:
On 07/18/19 11:13, William Unruh wrote:
Sure, but I do not have faith in the "averaging" If one is always 30us
after the other, then the average will always be out by 15us.
One would expect a difference, but how can you tell which one is right
using just 2 pps ?. With three, you could choose the closest to average
and discard the outlier, or if it was outside a defined window. Ok,
it's a bit nitpicking, but would still be interesting to try it.
No. The mechanism is clear. While one is answering its interrupt the
other gets to wait. So, it is the earliest one that is closest to
"right" Ie, do not try to use more than one interrupt on the same
computer. It does not work
A good timing-optimized gps unit, like the original Oncore, have a sw
mechanism to offset the PPS event away from the actual top of the
second, as well as a way for the sw protocol that numbers the PPS
signals to also specify how far away this particular pulse is from the
actual event.
I.e. with an internal 10 MHz clock, PPS signals will be synced to one of
those 100 ns-wide periods, so it can/will be at least up to +/-50 ns
away from the proper moment, but when the driver knows about this, it
can adjust perfectly for that effect.
Terje
--
- <Terje.Mathisen at tmsw.no>
"almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"
_______________________________________________
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
