On Friday 27 August 2010, Richard Cochran wrote: > On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 01:21:39PM -0700, john stultz wrote: > > On Thu, 2010-08-19 at 17:38 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 02:28:04PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > Have you considered passing a struct timex instead of ppb and ts? > > > > > > Yes, but the timex is not suitable, IMHO. > > > > Could you expand on this? > > We need to able to specify that the call is for a PTP clock. We could > add that to the modes flag, like this: > > /*timex.h*/ > #define ADJ_PTP_0 0x10000 > #define ADJ_PTP_1 0x20000 > #define ADJ_PTP_2 0x30000 > #define ADJ_PTP_3 0x40000 > > I can live with this, if everyone else can, too.
My suggestion was actually to have a new syscall with the existing structure, and pass a clockid_t value to it, similar to your sys_clock_adjtime(), not change the actual sys_adjtime syscall. > > Could we not add a adjustment mode ADJ_SETOFFSET or something that would > > provide the instantaneous offset correction? > > Yes, but we would also need to add a struct timespec to the struct > timex, in order to get nanosecond resolution. I think it would be > possible to do in the padding at the end? Yes, that's exactly what the padding is for. Instead of timespec, you can probably have a extra values for replacing the existing ppm values with ppb values. Arnd _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev