[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [questions] Re: GPS+PPS vs NTP server, why a huge offset ?

Daniel O'Connor <darius@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 17 Jun 2022, at 12:52, Jim Pennino <jimp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Daniel O'Connor <darius@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> On 17 Jun 2022, at 00:07, David Taylor <david-taylor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 16/06/2022 10:00, Thiebaud HUMBERT wrote:
>>>>> To do the inversion, I just changed the "Pulse Mode" parameter to "Falling edge" from "Rising edge".
>>>>> The offset induced by the "pulse length" has disappeared.
>>>>> But there is still an offset of around 10.3ms, which I think is induced by USB as explained in this article about other chipsets (https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-usb/2019- August/016078.html)
>>>> Yes, Thiebaud, USB is not good enough for PPS signals!
>>> This is absolutely false.
>>> If you are using it for NTP then GPS+PPS over USB is quite adequate (from personal experience).
>> As USB is a two wire interface, there is no such thing as PPS over USB.
> The fact USB only has 2 data lines is irrelevant to wether you can send PPS over USB.
>> You of course can get the ASCII data over USB, but to get a PPS signal
>> you in general have to hack a USB GPS and add a signal wire for PPS then
>> hack some interface on the computer to accept PPS.
> This is absolutely not true in any meaningful sense.

OK, then to which of the USB connector pins do you connect the PPS
signal to get "PPS over USB"?
This is questions@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subscribe: questions+subscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Unsubscribe: questions+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx