Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] pps: Drop the !NO_HZ_COMMON dependency from NTP_PPS

[Rodolfo Giometti <giometti@enneenne.com>]

Hi David,

On 29/09/2026 11:32, David Woodhouse wrote:
> When second_overflow() is delivering skew, timekeeping_max_deferment()
> should trigger a wakeup at the end of the second to ensure that the
> skew gets recalculated — rather than leaving it active indefinitely.

Please put this fix in the series before 2/4, as for the tick_length
one.

> So the results at https://david.woodhou.se/ntptest-r64/tickless/ need
> to be redone, but you can take a look and shout if you want me to
> change what I'm capturing or how I'm doing it.

What you capture is fine for me: the adjtimex state (offset, jitter,
stabil, errcnt) plus the per-pulse phase are what I wanted to see.

Two questions for the rerun:

- wouldn't it be better to also have the tickful baseline with the same
   board, the same GPS and the same pulse period, so the numbers can be
   compared directly?

- since typical PPS sources deliver 1 Hz, don't you think it would be
   better to also do one run with the timepulse at 1 Hz?

Ciao,

Rodolfo

-- 
GNU/Linux Solutions                  e-mail: giometti@enneenne.com
Linux Device Driver                          giometti@linux.it
Embedded Systems                     phone:  +39 349 2432127
UNIX programming