Hi,
On Wed, 27 Sep 2006, john stultz wrote:
> > You have to keep in mind that ntp time is basically advanced in 1 second
> > steps (or HZ ticks or freq cycles to be precise) and you have to keep that
> > property. You can slice that second however you like, but it still has to
> > add up to 1 second. Right now we slice it into HZ steps, but this can be
> > rather easily changed now.
>
> Right off, it seems it would then make sense to make the ntp "ticks" one
> second in length. And set the interval values accordingly.
>
> However, there might be clocksources that are incapable of running
> freely for a full second w/o overflowing. In that case we would need to
> set the interval values and the ntp tick length accordingly. It seems we
> need some sort of interface to ntp to define that base tick length.
> Would that be ok by you?
I don't see how you want to do this without some rather complex
calculations. I doubt this will make anything easier.
bye, Roman
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
