From: Dan Malek <dmalek@jlc.net>
To: Cort Dougan <cort@persephone.cs.nmt.edu>
Cc: Troy Benjegerdes <hozer@drgw.net>, linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org
Subject: Re: PReP RTC vs Decrementer accuracy...
Date: Tue, 08 Dec 1998 15:32:57 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <366D8CF9.55DF77F9@jlc.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Pine.LNX.3.96.981207215711.7923A-100000@persephone.cs.nmt.edu
Cort Dougan wrote:
> Right, the rtc is probably more accurate over a long period of time...
Nope, not even close. If you convert rtc drift specifications and
processor oscillator drift specifications to a common reference (like
PPM) you will see processor oscillators are significantly better
than any rtc. Of course, running PLLs with high multipliers, like
32kHz up to 50 Mhz will cause wide variations, but over a long
period of time they will they will be more accurate time keepers.
> ....... The drift should be corrected by
> a time daemon.
Yes, but sometimes they are the cause of the problem, so
check that too.
If the PPC decrementer does not appear to be keeping time correctly,
first ask how often the system is restarted. Since the time is
initially set from the rtc, if that is out of whack (and many are)
and you reboot frequently, the system time will drift from a
wall clock in a hurry. The decrementer should keep time
very accurately from system start up to shut down. If it
isn't we have some fixing to do. I believe the design to
be correct, but the implementation may be a little flawed.
-- Dan
[[ This message was sent via the linuxppc-dev mailing list. Replies are ]]
[[ not forced back to the list, so be sure to Cc linuxppc-dev if your ]]
[[ reply is of general interest. To unsubscribe from linuxppc-dev, send ]]
[[ the message 'unsubscribe' to linuxppc-dev-request@lists.linuxppc.org ]]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1998-12-08 20:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1998-12-07 12:31 USB, PCI and registers Benjamin Herrenschmidt
1998-12-07 21:02 ` PReP RTC vs Decrementer accuracy Troy Benjegerdes
1998-12-08 5:00 ` Cort Dougan
1998-12-08 20:32 ` Dan Malek [this message]
1998-12-08 23:52 ` Cort Dougan
1998-12-09 7:30 ` Troy Benjegerdes
1998-12-09 8:25 ` Cort Dougan
1998-12-09 23:52 ` Corey Minyard
1998-12-10 4:20 ` Corey Minyard
1998-12-10 5:48 ` Cort Dougan
1998-12-10 10:58 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
1998-12-10 16:00 ` Corey Minyard
1998-12-09 20:37 ` Dan Malek
1998-12-10 5:57 ` Guy G. Sotomayor, Jr.
1998-12-10 17:53 ` Dan Malek
1998-12-10 19:26 ` Guy G. Sotomayor, Jr.
1998-12-11 5:53 ` Dan Malek
1998-12-13 17:05 ` Gabriel Paubert
1998-12-14 6:45 ` Dan Malek
1998-12-15 20:12 ` Dan Malek
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=366D8CF9.55DF77F9@jlc.net \
--to=dmalek@jlc.net \
--cc=cort@persephone.cs.nmt.edu \
--cc=hozer@drgw.net \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org \
/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).