[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2c0942db0802282225j7d01eee3vbe6bbb7b93e86e47@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 22:25:06 -0800
From: "Ray Lee" <ray-lk@...rabbit.org>
To: "Roman Zippel" <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc: "john stultz" <johnstul@...ibm.com>,
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] Remove obsolete CLOCK_TICK_ADJUST
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 8:49 PM, Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
> Revert bbe4d18ac2e058c56adb0cd71f49d9ed3216a405 and
> e13a2e61dd5152f5499d2003470acf9c838eab84 and remove CLOCK_TICK_ADJUST
> completely. Add a optional kernel parameter ntp_tick_adj instead to allow
> adjusting of a large base drift and thus keeping ntpd happy.
Wait, so you're saying that something that the kernel correctly
figures out on its own today should instead be a kernel parameter,
with users having to supply it explicitly? Am I confused?
If I'm not confused, would you'd be so kind to explain to the peanut
gallery over here why this is a good thing?
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists