[lkml]   [2010]   [Dec]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH V7 1/8] ntp: add ADJ_SETOFFSET mode bit
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 05:27:58AM +0900, Kuwahara,T. wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 7:25 AM, john stultz <> wrote:
> > I don't see why that would be better then adding a
> > clear new mode flag?
> In short, time step is a special case of time slew. Those are the same,
> only different in one parameter, as is shown in my previous post.
> That's why I said there's no need for adding a new mode.

Well, in addition to the objections raised by John, your suggested
implementation is also shortsighted. The field timex.constant is
copied into time_constant in some code paths. Obviously, this would be
a bad thing when timex.constant==-huge.

So, you need to clarify the interaction between ADJ_OFFSET,
ADJ_TIMECONST, ADJ_TAI, timex.constant, time_constant, and MAXTC.

If you would fully implement your idea, I expect it would become
obvious that it a bit of a hack, both in the kernel code and in the
user space interface. But, if you disagree, please just post a patch
with the complete implementation...


 \ /
  Last update: 2010-12-23 07:17    [W:0.085 / U:3.544 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site