Re: Linux time code

[john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>]

On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 15:50 -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Thursday, August 17, 2006 3:32 pm, john stultz wrote:
> > On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 15:11 -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > > On Thursday, August 17, 2006 2:58 pm, john stultz wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 13:43 +0200, Roman Zippel wrote:
> > > > > What is missing is the abiltity to map a clock to a posix clock,
> > > > > so that you would have CLOCK_REALTIME/CLOCK_MONOTONIC as NTP
> > > > > controlled clocks and other CLOCK_* as the raw clock.
> > > >
> > > > Is there a use case for this (wanting non-NTP corrected time on a
> > > > system running NTPd) you have in mind?
> > >
> > > Isn't this what CLOCK_MONOTONIC[_HR] is for?  It's not supposed to
> > > jump around at all, so the basic usage model is to use this source
> > > for timestamping purposes...
> >
> > Well, CLOCK_MONOTONIC is not affected by calls to settimeofday() so it
> > will never go backward, however it does get frequency correction if
> > provided by NTP (thus a second will be a correct second and you won't
> > accumulate error).
> 
> Hm, I guess that's ok for most of the timestamp applications I'm aware of 
> as long as NTP won't cause the clock to stand still...

Nope. Its limited to a +/-500ppm adjustment max.


> FWIW I think many other Unices provide a raw cycle counter via the POSIX 
> clock routines.  I don't imagine they're NTP corrected, since at least 
> on IRIX the application is expected to handle even cycle counter 
> wraparound.

Yea, I just want to make sure we're not creating a
portability/maintenance nightmare by exporting too much raw hardware
information.

thanks
-john

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