On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 05:04:36PM +0100, Rodolfo Giometti wrote: > I'd like submit my LinuxPPS implementation to Linux main tree but > before I have to fix some issues about RFC specifications. > > The RFC 2783 says that «pps_handle_t type is an opaque scalar type > used to represent a PPS source within the API» but in my > implementation I intentionally want to separate the concept of file > descriptor to the concept of the PPS source since some devices do not > have such association (some devices are directly connected to a > dedicated interrupt line for example), and to support this I need a > struct as "pps_handle_t". > > If the GPS receiver is connected to a serial line then everything > works well but, if this is not true, we have no "filedes" to pass to > the function time_pps_create(). That's why I also added a new function > time_pps_findsource() in order to find a generic PPS source (note that > this function is protected by the PPS_HAVE_FINDSOURCE define). > > So, my opinion is that RFC 2783 should say that «pps_handle_t type is > an opaque __variable__ used to represent a PPS source within the API» > and programs should not access to it directly due its opacity. > > I'd like to know if this is the right place to discuss about this > topic or if I should post my message elsewhere.
I'd like to know if the questions above are off-topic on this list since I still received no answers. :'( If they are so, please suggest to me the right place where I should send them. Regards, Rodolfo -- GNU/Linux Solutions e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Linux Device Driver [EMAIL PROTECTED] Embedded Systems [EMAIL PROTECTED] UNIX programming phone: +39 349 2432127 _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
