From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Oct 21 16:47:30 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C19E16A41F; Fri, 21 Oct 2005 16:47:30 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from marcel@xcllnt.net) Received: from ns1.xcllnt.net (209-128-86-226.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.86.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE55343D45; Fri, 21 Oct 2005 16:47:29 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from marcel@xcllnt.net) Received: from [192.168.4.250] (dhcp50.pn.xcllnt.net [192.168.4.250]) by ns1.xcllnt.net (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j9LGlSXH087200; Fri, 21 Oct 2005 09:47:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from marcel@xcllnt.net) In-Reply-To: <30805.1129910750@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <30805.1129910750@critter.freebsd.dk> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v734) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <0D10B55A-A82D-433F-81CA-A5A02B36DA75@xcllnt.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Marcel Moolenaar Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 09:47:27 -0700 To: Poul-Henning Kamp X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.734) Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, Andre Oppermann , cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, Bruce Evans Subject: Re: Timekeeping [Was: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/vmstat vmstat.c src/usr.bin/w w.c] X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 16:47:30 -0000 On Oct 21, 2005, at 9:05 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <20051022011020.T5554@delplex.bde.org>, Bruce Evans writes: > > > >> How do you resync laptops after suspending them for long enough for >> the clock to drift? Use ntpd and let it step, or use ntpd -x and let >> it take hours to resync? The right thing to do is step the clocks to >> the current time immediately so that they are correct while the >> system >> is actually being used. >> > > Ahh, and now we get into interesting territory: What _is_ the > definition of uptime for a laptop which has been suspended ? I don't think the definition has to change, but I don't know what the *exact* definition of uptime is. Wikipedia says this: "Uptime is a measure of the time a computer system has been up and running. It came into use to describe the opposite of downtime, times when a system was non-operational." Given this, suspend is downtime and the uptime is therefore defined as the amount of time since resume. Doesn't seem unreasonable to me. > Again, if you have been sitting in DDB, what exactly is the definition > of "uptime" ? Since the kernel is non-operational while in DDB, uptime is to reset when leaving DDB. Again, according to the Wikipedia definition of uptime. I'm having more problems finding this reasonable, but it's not unacceptable. The question therefore is: which definition of uptime do we try to implement? -- Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel@xcllnt.net