I noticed that message, but I thought you meant "ntpdate" instead of "ntpd"
because you mentioned it in the context of boot-up. It sounds like just
what we need.
I'll work out a plan with my co-workers for updating the board and contact
you if I run into problems with ntpd.
Thanks! And to other
Hi Tom
We use the exact same procedure that you outline below to timestamp
our data and ran into the same problem. It turned out to be due to
integer rounding in Uboot's clock configuration. Please update your
uboot and kernel to the newest versions. I sent around an email on 01
December
I haven't tried it on the ROACH, but we've had great results (i.e.
much better than 1 ms) with the IEEE Precision Time Protocol (using
ptpd, from ptpd.sourceforge.net). You might want to give that a try
before you resort to fancier solutions.
--Andy
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 8:40 PM, Tom Downes w
Hi Tom
We use hardware time tagging in some of the spectrometers we've built,
accurate to a few nS, described below:
We've implemented time tagging in spectrometers and correlators (we can
send you some spectrometer
designs if you want), by running the ADC sample clock from a
synthesizer loc
Hello:
I am new to the list and to ROACH boards so apologies in advance if this
question is misdirected. I am working at Caltech on using a ROACH(1) board
running BORPH via USB. Specifically debian/etch with
kernel 2.6.25-svn1867-dirty1.
Our application requires timestamping FFT data to precisi
5 matches
Mail list logo
