[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1235689182.6811.34.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 14:59:42 -0800
From: john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Jesper Krogh <jesper@...gh.cc>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>
Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.29-rc6
On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 14:40 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Thu, 26 Feb 2009, john stultz wrote:
> >
> > I'll kick up some of my own testing between these two releases to see if
> > I can't find something similar.
>
> Since the PIT timer read is possibly hw-dependent, it might be that you
> can't necessarily reproduce it on some random hardware.
>
> How sensitive is ntpd to (stable) drift? IOW, if we get the calibration
> wrong, the TSC should still hopefully be very _stable_, it's just that the
> initial guesstimate for the frequency is off and ntp would have to correct
> for that.
NTP can adjust the clock about +/-500ppm (so a 1000ppm range). Past that
it starts throwing errors.
Part of the issue is that if the drift value changes in between boots,
NTPd can take a while to settle down on the right freq. I suspect that's
whats happening here, and should the box be left alone for a few hours
(maybe overnight) NTPd will find the new drift correction the issue will
go away.
Thomas tripped over this a little while back when the
NTP_INTERVAL_LENGTH change landed, but I think that was prior to 2.6.26,
so its probably the calibration changes discussed, but I wanted to see
if there were any other slight changes that might be contributing to the
issue as well.
thanks
-john
--
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