[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1e02cc71-baee-1e75-9160-062d563af795@enneenne.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 15:26:55 +0100
From: Rodolfo Giometti <giometti@...eenne.com>
To: "N, Pandith" <pandith.n@...el.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Sangannavar, Mallikarjunappa"
<mallikarjunappa.sangannavar@...el.com>,
"D, Lakshmi Sowjanya" <lakshmi.sowjanya.d@...el.com>,
"T R, Thejesh Reddy" <thejesh.reddy.t.r@...el.com>,
"Hall, Christopher S" <christopher.s.hall@...el.com>
Subject: Re: PPS functionality for Intel Timed I/O
On 30/01/23 15:11, N, Pandith wrote:
> Here is a presentation link for Timed I/O device
> https://lpc.events/event/16/contributions/1387/attachments/1051/2010/Timed_IO_LPC.pdf
Thanks. I'll take a look at it.
> Intel Timed I/O PIN has both generator functionality and input capability.
> Wanted to ask if it’s better to have two separate drivers, one under client
> for input and other as generator driver for PPS output.
> OR
> Have a single client driver and user can choose the functionality (either
> PPS output or as PPS source to capture pulses with timestamps).
Within kernel sources PPS clients and PPS generators are placed into different
directories, so I suppose is better to deploy two different pieces of code.
However pay attention to the fact that a PPS generator should be referred to
system's main clock and not to peripherals' clock.
Ciao,
Rodolfo
--
GNU/Linux Solutions e-mail: giometti@...eenne.com
Linux Device Driver giometti@...ux.it
Embedded Systems phone: +39 349 2432127
UNIX programming skype: rodolfo.giometti
Powered by blists - more mailing lists