Re: Linux timekeeping plans

Stefan Monnier (monnier+lists/linux/kernel/news/@tequila.cs.yale.edu)
03 Dec 1998 14:11:24 -0500


>>>>> "Colin" == Colin Plumb <colin@nyx.net> writes:
> Slaving the clock does require some care, but because the interrupt
> latency situation inside a single box is not nearly as messy as
> internet delays that NTP deals with, the algorithms aren't as

I must say (as an NTP user) that I don't understand: why don't you just
allow xntpd to use the RTC as a local clock and let xntpd slave ths system
clock with it ?

> The one thing that I'm still stuck on is SMP issues. While it appears
> that the TSC counters are kept synchronized by current SMP PC hardware,
> this is not guaranteed,

I seem to remember messages on this list a few weeks back stating fairly
clearly that several parts of Linux already rely critically on all TSC being
synchonized (and thus Linux ensuring that it is the case).

Stefan

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/