From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 25 11:54:58 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D99F316A4DD for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 11:54:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scheidell@secnap.net) Received: from secnap2.secnap.com (secnap2.secnap.com [204.89.241.128]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7092043D49 for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 11:54:57 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scheidell@secnap.net) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable content-class: urn:content-classes:message X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6603.0 Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 07:54:54 -0400 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: FBSD 5.5 and software timers Thread-Index: AcavwFlZI7GndGbtRPC9lIOzU1wYvQAIG70A From: "Michael Scheidell" To: "Peter Jeremy" Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: RE: FBSD 5.5 and software timers X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 11:54:58 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: Peter Jeremy [mailto:peterjeremy@optushome.com.au]=20 > Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2006 4:00 AM > To: Michael Scheidell > Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: FBSD 5.5 and software timers >=20 >=20 > Basically, when you ask for a 200msec delay, the kernel=20 > sleeps until an absolute time. It looks like the handling of=20 > absolute time sleeps across time steps was changed. =20 > Unfortunately, both approaches are equally valid in different=20 > circumstances. I agree >=20 > >It fails within 1 second of getting these types of log=20 > entries: Jul 23=20 > >15:03:42 audit18 ntpd[473]: time reset -2.497234 s Jul 23 16:03:56=20 > >audit18 ntpd[473]: time reset +1.532401 s >=20 > Rather than focussing on the changed sleep handling, I=20 > suggest you concentrate on fixing your clock: Your system=20 > clock should not be stepping. >=20 Except: 20 different machines. Some IBM 300's with 2.0Ghz P4,s, 305 and 306's with 2.8P4, some DELL 750's and 850's with 2.8p4 with HTT enabled. Even the 5.4 machines shows the bifurcating -1, +2, -2, +1 time resets, but timers work more like I want them to. > I presume the servers are all stable (ie not stepping) and=20 > have a reasonably low delay. If so, I suspect your ntpd PLL=20 > has locked up. I've seen problems with some versions of ntpd=20 20 different machines?