<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#fffffe" text="#000000">
I believe that a kernal patch is not the correct way to do that.
It's too specific as it's only for some ublox modules.� <br>
I believe it should be a driver as a Loadable Kernel Module. <br>
This also allows people to easily modify the source to their own
needs, without needing to patch. <br>
<br>
I'm working on one now. Selectable triggers of Timemark 1, rising
and falling, and Timemark 2, rising and falling, providing up to
four timestamps for calculating four offsets, observing noise, etc.,
once the timestamps are back in user space.<br>
<br>
A cycle of triggering timemarks (one cycle per second) can be
initiated:<br>
- by the PPS so it's aligned with GPS UTC, or <br>
- it can run without PPS, aligned with system time TOS. <br>
<br>
Best guess, I've coded it to trigger timemarks at 250 ms, 415 ms,
580 ms and 745 ms, to keep those tasks spaced apart, yet away from
the module producing PPS at TOS and its epoch message delivery. We
can see results and modify when we'd like those to occur. <br>
<br>
I'm held up deciding on the method of sending messages for each
Trigger Timestamp from the kernel module back to user space. <br>
Looks like it should be a socket. <br>
<br>
Michael<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 20/08/2018 9:13 AM, Udo van den
Heuvel via devel wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:adaca457-c5ce-3b63-d55d-ca8ced20e00b@xs4all.nl"
type="cite"><br>
How to get the timemark kernel patch into Linux?
<br>
Do we really need it? (can we work around it?)
<br>
<br>
Udo
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>