> > I just found a problem with the kernel-pll in 2.0.34pre10 (well it
> > hasn't changed since at least 2.0.33 as far as I can tell). It only
>
> It has subtley
>
> > than +/- 200ppm. I think this should be (2 * HZ)ppm. If this is a
> > really bad idea please let me know! Can this be added to 2.0.34 (and
> > 2.1.x if appropriate)?
The 200PPM are completely independent from HZ; they indicate how fast
the clock looses precision, and it depends on the ambient temerature
the most. 200PPM is the recommended value for room temperature
quartz. The previous value was too high IMHO. It should be
user-settable, but the RFC doesn't support it.
>
> It looks right to me
>
> > As an aside can anyone tell me a good reason why ntp_adjtime() and
> > ntp_gettime() are not implemented in glibc (2.0.7 and earlier don't
> > have them). Not putting them in libc makes xntpd3 have to work much
Honestly, the kernel implementation is still a mess, but I didn't
have much time recently.
> > harder to use the kernel-pll (xntp3-5.93 won't detect it at all on my
> > alphas without much hackery. I can provide trivial wrappers to
> > __adjtimex() if anyone wants them. When I reported the problems to the
> > xntpd maintainers they suggested I switch to FreeBSD!
Make a patch (to glibc or to xntp)!
>
> Send the diffs to the glibc maintainers. Im sure they'll be happy to add
> them
Agreed!
(At work since 7:50)
Regards,
Ulrich
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu