Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Linux 2.6.29-rc6 | From | john stultz <> | Date | Tue, 03 Mar 2009 11:53:46 -0800 |
| |
On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 07:04 +0100, Jesper Krogh wrote: > john stultz wrote: > > On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 10:53 +0100, Jesper Krogh wrote: > >> john stultz wrote: > >>> Ok, so it seems ntp hasn't really had a chance to settle down, its only > >>> made a 10ppm adjustment so far. NTPd will stop corrections at ~ > >>> +/-500ppm, so you're not at that bound yet, where things would be really > >>> broken. > >>> > >>> If the affected kernel isn't resetting in the logs anymore, I'd be > >>> interested in what the new ppm value is. > >> After 20 hours.. its still resetting. > >> Mar 2 10:43:24 quad12 ntpd[4416]: synchronized to 10.194.133.12, stratum 4 > >> Mar 2 10:50:37 quad12 ntpd[4416]: time reset -1.103654 s > > > > So what's the "ntpdc -c kerninfo" output now? > > Mar 3 06:41:10 quad12 ntpd[4416]: time reset -0.813957 s > Mar 3 06:45:20 quad12 ntpd[4416]: synchronized to LOCAL(0), stratum 13 > Mar 3 06:45:36 quad12 ntpd[4416]: synchronized to 10.194.133.12, stratum 4 > Mar 3 06:51:57 quad12 ntpd[4416]: synchronized to 10.194.133.13, stratum 4 > Mar 3 07:00:29 quad12 ntpd[4416]: time reset -0.783390 s > jk@quad12:~$ ntpdc -c kerninfo > pll offset: 0 s > pll frequency: -28.691 ppm
This is baffling. You've only gone from -34.754ppm to -28.691ppm in over a day? And you're still not syncing? If the calibration was so bad that NTP couldn't sync, I'd expect the freq value to hit +/-500ppm before it gave up. This just doesn't follow my expectations.
Could you provide: /usr/sbin/ntpdc -c version
Do you see the same behavior if you drop all but one server (including the local clock: 127.127.1.0)?
You might also add "minpoll 4 maxpoll 4" to the server line to speed up testing.
Actually, if you could, I'd be interested if you could send your ntp.conf
thanks -john
| |