[ntp:questions] new driver development

Harlan Stenn stenn at ntp.org
Thu Mar 17 22:05:29 UTC 2011


Bill wrote:

> I suspect what he had in mind was to make an entirely new driver, with
> a new number, which was the posix shm driver, and hope that eventually
> the old one would decay from lack of use. (His statement that his new
> driver would not support non-posix shm was my hint.) Of course that
> leads to driver proliferation ( do we really want a world where there
> are 16000 drivers?  Actually more than 255 would be problematic) since
> drivers are never dropped ( someone might be using them) as can be
> seen from some of the drivers which are in there and which I suspect
> at most one person in the world uses.

I read this and it only adds to my belief that we need a "refclock
definition language" and a means to easily customize them.  From what I
can see, this solution elegantly solves a fairly encompassing "problem
space".

Just so it's handy still:

 http://support.ntp.org/bin/view/Dev/GSoCProjectIdeas#Refclock_Definition_Language
 http://support.ntp.org/bin/view/Dev/LoadableRefclockDrivers

H



More information about the questions mailing list