[time-nuts] GPS message jitter (was GPS for Nixie Clock)

Scott Stobbe scott.j.stobbe at gmail.com
Mon Jul 18 16:44:19 EDT 2016

Well, I suppose in the case of USB, the host hardware (consumer PC) is not
going to have any special hardware. But, if a gps receiver implements a USB
interface, in addition to standard NEMA data, it could also report the
phase and frequency error of your USB clock (since it has to recover it
anyways to get the usb data).

I don't have the answer here, but usb-audio ICs suffer similar problems in
clock distribution. The gist of it seems to be locking on the hosts SOF
SYSTEMS <http://www.cypress.com/file/122521/download>

On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 2:43 PM, jimlux <jimlux at earthlink.net> wrote:

> On 7/18/16 8:51 AM, Scott Stobbe wrote:
>> I suppose it is one of those cases where, the GPS designers decided you
>> shouldn't ever use the serial data for sub-second timing, and consequently
>> spent no effort on serial latency and jitter.
>> Most UARTs I have come across have been synthesized with a 16x baud clock
>> and included flow control. It would not have been too much effort to spec
>> latency as some mu ±100 ns and jitter of ±1/(16*baud).
>> For 9600 baud, the jitter on the start bit would be ±6.5 us.
>> If CTS was resampled a 1 full bit time (9600 baud), the jitter would
>> be ±104 us.
> except that virtually every UART in use today has some sort of buffering
> (whether a FIFO or double buffering) between the CPU interface and the bits
> on the wire, which completely desynchronizes the bits on the wire from the
> CPU interface.
> Determinism in UART timing between the CPU bus interface and the "bits on
> the wire" has never been something that is specified.  You can go back to
> venerable parts like the 8251, and there's no spec in the data sheet.
> ( there's a tCR specified as 16 tCY for the read setup time from CTS*,
> DSR* to READ* assert.  And tSRX (2 usec min) and tHRX (2 usec min) for the
> setup and hold of the internal sampling pulse relative to RxD. And 20 tCY
> as a max from center of stop bit to RxRDY, and then whatever the delay is
> from the internal RxRDY to the bus read)
> There's "what we observed in a running circuit" or "what we inferred from
> knowing the internal design".
> Since a huge number of serial ports these days are implemented with a USB
> interface, the timing uncertainty is even greater, because you're dealing
> with the 8kHz frame timing on USB.
> This is why PTP compatible interfaces added time tagging to the PHY layer.
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.

More information about the time-nuts mailing list