Re: [PATCH V7 1/8] ntp: add ADJ_SETOFFSET mode bit

[Richard Cochran]

On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 05:27:58AM +0900, Kuwahara,T. wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 7:25 AM, john stultz <johnstul@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I don't see why that would be better then adding a
> > clear new mode flag?
> 
> In short, time step is a special case of time slew.  Those are the same,
> only different in one parameter, as is shown in my previous post.
> That's why I said there's no need for adding a new mode.

Well, in addition to the objections raised by John, your suggested
implementation is also shortsighted. The field timex.constant is
copied into time_constant in some code paths. Obviously, this would be
a bad thing when timex.constant==-huge.

So, you need to clarify the interaction between ADJ_OFFSET,
ADJ_TIMECONST, ADJ_TAI, timex.constant, time_constant, and MAXTC.

If you would fully implement your idea, I expect it would become
obvious that it a bit of a hack, both in the kernel code and in the
user space interface. But, if you disagree, please just post a patch
with the complete implementation...

Thanks,
Richard
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/