On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 04:56:24 +0000, Dave Hart wrote:
> It hasn't come up there, but I've been thinking about backwards
> compatibility in an updated refclock_shm which supports the existing
> SysV shared memory, struct shmTime, and access methods for units 0-3,
> and uses POSIX named shared memory with new layout and access semantics
> for units 4 and up.
I presume that means (in each of the driver functions) something like:
if (unit < 4) {
/* do SHM driver stuff (SVID) */
} else {
/* do new stuff */
}
Is that correct?
> I encourage you to join hack...@lists.ntp.org and/or create a bug report
> at http://bugs.ntp.org/ and share what you've done, if you want to see
> some part of it make it into an updated refclock_shm.c.
I'm already subscribed to more mailing lists than I can keep up with!
If I were continuing with my original plan or redoing it, I'd do things
differently from what I have done. But I have another plan which can
avoid the word size/endianness/locking issues altogether, and it provides
for future precision beyond the nanosecond level. More details to follow
in due course.
_______________________________________________
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
