[ntp:questions] Time server question
xxx.syseng.yyy at gfsys.co.uk
Fri Jul 19 17:44:30 UTC 2019
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.
> Writing a special interrupt handler (eg for the parallel port) whose
> first action is to read the system clock, and it can then allow other
> interrupts to be handled. That will be good to about 1us. (time to have
> the interrupt hadler to be loaded into memory, and for it to read the
> system clock).
Don't know enough about FreeBSD, but perhaps there is some way to
specify interrupt priority for a device to minimise latency. It's
certainly possible to do that at hardware level, but there's still
the data pathway uncertainty between the h/w interrupt and the ntp code.
Signals, shared memory, process priority etc, all introduce uncertainty.
None of these os's were designed for real time work, but clearly good
enough for the task...
> I think the main problem witht he serial port is that it seems to take
> longer to read that the interrupt has occurred. But I did my
> experiments 20 years ago.
More information about the questions