From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Sep  9 21:44:41 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6394816A41F
	for <freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org>; Fri,  9 Sep 2005 21:44:41 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from jkim@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from anuket.mj.niksun.com (gwnew.niksun.com [65.115.46.162])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7AD343D46
	for <freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org>; Fri,  9 Sep 2005 21:44:40 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from jkim@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from niksun.com (anuket [10.70.0.5])
	by anuket.mj.niksun.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j89LnviK065325
	for <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>; Fri, 9 Sep 2005 17:49:57 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from jkim@FreeBSD.org)
From: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org>
To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2005 17:44:24 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <200509091744.26505.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.85.1/1073/Fri Sep 9 11:13:08 2005 on
	anuket.mj.niksun.com
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Cc: 
Subject: time_second vs. time_uptime
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2005 21:44:41 -0000

If I read the source correctly, time_second can go backwards or 
forwards when there is a leap second but time_uptime cannot.  Am I 
right?  If my assumption is right, it seems we have some misuses in 
kernel, e. g., sched_sync() in sys/kern/vfs_subr.c.  It may not be 
critical but it worries me a little because a leap second is 
scheduled to occur at the end of this year. ;-)

Thanks,

Jung-uk Kim