On 08/20/2013 01:16 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <5213b89d.4070...@pobox.com>, David Gravereaux writes: > >> I guess I can't go with TSC on this hardware. > > You never should, for precision timekeeping, for a host of technical > hacks, all outside your control. > > The most interesting hardware for precision timekeeping these days > are the Intel 82599 10Gbit/s ethernet controller, which has support > for PTP packet stamping *AND* support for timing electrical signals > using the same free-running counter as used for the PTP packets. > > It's only somewhat semi-documented in the 1000 page data-sheet, > but it's the best chip there is right now, and a board will > only set you back a few hundred USD.
How does that compare to the i210 which I'm using? Off-hand, it's using the same igb driver with the PTP and PPS kernel services. Also, and still back to my question, NTPd's control of the radio and PPS signal wouldn't be using the same PPS kernel service would it? That would great, but still I'm not sure. -- David Gravereaux <davyg...@pobox.com>
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
