linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] correct inconsistent ntp interval/tick

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 29 Jan 2008 05:02:21 +0100 (CET)
From:	Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>
To:	john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
cc:	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] correct inconsistent ntp interval/tick_length usage

Hi,

On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, john stultz wrote:

> Regardless, current_tick_length() really is the base interval we're
> using in the error accumulation loop, so it seems the cleanest interface
> to use (just to avoid redundancy at least) when establishing the
> clocksource's interval length. Or do you not agree?

I see, what you need to use in timex.h for !CONFIG_NO_HZ is:

#define NTP_INTERVAL_LENGTH ((s64)LATCH * NSEC_PER_SEC) / (s64)CLOCK_TICK_RATE)

this calculates the base length of a clock tick in nsec.

current_tick_length() would only work during boot. If you switch clocks 
later, it would include random adjustments specific to the old clock.

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