Merged
Conversation
…late clock offset. Simply use the most recently-received packet's timestamp and assume 700 usec ESW processing + transmission latency.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The nplay probe header->time is not filled correctly on the Gemini NSP. It seems to be derived from a different, buggy counter that runs at 95.6% of real time (exactly 0xE000 ticks per 2-second interval instead of 60000).
This PR adds a fallback method when the clock offset estimation is pure. It simply uses the most recently-received packet's timestamp compared to its receipt time, and assumes 700 microseconds of ESW processing + transmission latency.
I don't like hard-coding this kinds of assumptions but it's approximately correct based on some timing I've done with a raspberry pi slaved to the Gemini device's PTP clocks.