From: "Csókás Bence" <csokas.bence@prolan.hu>
To: Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Szentendrei, Tamás" <szentendrei.tamas@prolan.hu>,
"Alexandre Belloni" <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2] rtc: pcf2127: Add PPS capability through Seconds Interrupt
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2024 11:16:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c0b6ad83-b9d4-43e7-8c1a-14b71a2060f8@prolan.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZmlTQsgRiW9fmYcB@localhost>
On 6/12/24 09:50, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 10:06:39PM -0700, Richard Cochran wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 05:04:57PM +0200, Csókás, Bence wrote:
>>
>>> PCF2127/29/31 is capable of generating an interrupt on every
>>> second (SI) or minute (MI) change. It signals this through
>>> the Minute/Second Flag (MSF) as well, which needs to be cleared.
>>
>> This is a RFC, and my comment is that a PPS from an RTC is not useful
>> to the Linux kernel.
>
> I think a TCXO-based RTC can be useful to user space to improve
> holdover performance with NTP/PTP.
Exactly.
> There already is the RTC_UIE_ON
> ioctl to enable interrupts and receive them in user space.
>
> The advantage of the PPS device over the ioctl would be more accurate
> timestamping (kernel vs user-space). Should PPS be supported, it would
> be nice if it worked generally with all drivers that support RTC_UIE_ON.
As we've discussed in v1, UIE hardware support is being removed from the
RTC subsystem, which I tried to optionally re-introduce. Since there was
no response since then, I assumed that there is no willingness to do
that, so I chose the next best option, the PPS subsystem.
On 5/28/24 19:56, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> This has been removed from the kernel 13 years ago. What is your use
> case to reintroduce it?
I also agree that multiple RTCs would benefit from this feature.
However, we should only add it to those which *have* hardware support
for a "one second has elapsed" signal. UIE is currently implemented by
setting an alarm to the next second, which didn't work well with the
PCF2129.
Bence
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-12 9:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-11 15:04 [RFC PATCH v2] rtc: pcf2127: Add PPS capability through Seconds Interrupt Csókás, Bence
2024-06-12 5:06 ` Richard Cochran
2024-06-12 7:50 ` Miroslav Lichvar
2024-06-12 9:16 ` Csókás Bence [this message]
2024-06-12 11:01 ` Alexandre Belloni
2024-06-13 3:25 ` Richard Cochran
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=c0b6ad83-b9d4-43e7-8c1a-14b71a2060f8@prolan.hu \
--to=csokas.bence@prolan.hu \
--cc=alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mlichvar@redhat.com \
--cc=richardcochran@gmail.com \
--cc=szentendrei.tamas@prolan.hu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).