netdev - Re: [PATCH 0/2] [RFC] posix clock tuning

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:	Thu, 9 Sep 2010 14:50:57 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-api@...r.kernel.org, john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] [RFC] posix clock tuning

On Thu, 9 Sep 2010, Richard Cochran wrote:
> From my point of view, the discussion is going round in circles. There

Sorry for coming late and adding more to the general confusion. :)

> seems to be agreement that supporting PTP hardware clocks is a good
> idea. The objections seem to be about the form of the API. In general,
> there are three avenues.
> 
> 1. character device (like hpet)
> 2. posix clock api
> 3. sysfs
> 
> Or possibly some combination of the three.

I fail to see the requirement for any of those. Either the hardware
clock is suitable as a clocksource for general consumption, then it
should just be used as a clock source. If it's not - e.g. because it's
too slow to access - then it just should serve as a reference in the
NTP style and steer the timekeeping into sync.

As I said in the other reply, I know that you want a global
synchronized clock aside of CLOCK_REALTIME, but that's an easy to
solve problem.

See my other reply for details.

Thanks,

	tglx

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html