[ntp:questions] Re: bc637PCI-U Reference Clock Driver

David L. Mills mills at udel.edu
Sat May 7 01:01:14 UTC 2005


Actually, the TPRO driver (12), Bancomm (16) and TT560 (41) drivers are 
very similar, since all they do at each poll event is suck up some 
registers, reformat as necessary, and let the refclock interface do the 
rest. I may have the last TPRO interface in the world and all my SBus 
machines have died, so probably driver 12 should be retired. Driver 16 
is in active use at the UNSO sites now. I don't know how many TT560 
boards there are out there; I have one and I suspect TrueTime sold a 
bunch of them now probably on EBay.

I think it only makes sense to combine the drivers if the result did not 
need to be told which device is connected other than perhaps to 
configure the device name and/or link. For the combined Spectracom, 
Truetime and ACTS drivers, you don't need to do anything except install 
the link.

In any case, I'm not thrilled about patching one driver to create 
another. That's what the original USNO driver did and that created 
problems. None of the driver sources now require any other sources other 
than header files and the common interface. So, if you believe combining 
your driver with the Bancomm driver is not practical, please consider to 
implement yours as a standalone driver.


Rob wrote:
> David L. Mills wrote:
>>Can you make the case that the new driver is significantly different
>>than the existing TT560 driver and that they cannot be combined as
> are
>>the Spectracom and TrueTime family drivers?
> Hello Dr. Mills,
> I submitted updates to existing driver #16, but it looked moribund to
> me.
> I don't see differences between #16 and #41, TT560, that are so great
> that they could not be merged. The result might be a little twisty, but
> I think it looks manageable.
> I could try putting them together, if that would be a Good Thing.

More information about the questions mailing list