Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 21:57:57 +0900 From: Tomoaki AOKI <junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Will 10.2 also ship with a very stale NTP? Message-ID: <20150716215757.5dd13a04d134bba8ea290893@dec.sakura.ne.jp> In-Reply-To: <1436726929.1334.202.camel@freebsd.org> References: <20150710235810.GA76134@rwpc16.gfn.riverwillow.net.au> <20150712032256.GB19305@satori.lan> <20150712050443.GA22240@server.rulingia.com> <20150712154416.b9f3713893fe28bfab1dd4d7@dec.sakura.ne.jp> <CAGMYy3vKEUCD=Ssxt%2B2Vny4eQ7CNQHTxNKncyQnRk5dPQU6ZtA@mail.gmail.com> <20150712184910.2d8d5f085ae659d5b9a2aba0@dec.sakura.ne.jp> <1436715703.1334.193.camel@freebsd.org> <20150712183140.GB22240@server.rulingia.com> <1436726929.1334.202.camel@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Xin, Ian: Confirmed MFC of ntp 4.2.8p3 and related kernel fix. Thanks for your work! re@: Thanks for approving MFC at this timing, before creating releng/10.2. John: Congraturations! We have latest stable version of ntp with 10.2. :-) On Sun, 12 Jul 2015 12:48:49 -0600 Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org> wrote: > On Mon, 2015-07-13 at 04:31 +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote: > > On 2015-Jul-12 09:41:43 -0600, Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org> wrote: > > >And let's all just hope that a week or two of testing is enough when > > >jumping a major piece of software forward several years in its > > >independent evolution. > > > > Whilst I support John's desire for NTP to be updated, I also do not > > think this is the appropriate time to do so. That said, the final > > decision is up to re@. > > > > >The import of 4.2.8p2 several months ago resulted in complete failure of > > >timekeeping on all my arm systems. Just last week I tracked it down to > > >a kernel bug (which I haven't committed the fix for yet). While the bug > > >has been in the kernel for years, it tooks a small change in ntpd > > >behavior to trigger it. > > > > > >Granted it's an odd corner-case problem that won't affect most users > > >because they just use the stock ntp.conf file (and it only affects > > >systems that have a large time step due to no battery-backed clock). > > >But it took me weeks to find enough time to track down the cause of the > > >problem. > > > > I'm not using the stock ntp.conf on my RPis and didn't notice any NTP > > issues. Are you able to provide more details of either the ntp.conf > > options that trigger the bug or the kernel bug itself? A quick search > > failed to find anything. > > > > I just committed the kernel fix as r285424; the commit message has some > info on why the new ntpd made the problem visible. > > I should have said "stock rc.conf and ntp.conf"... To get the problem to > happen you've got to set rc.conf ntpd_sync_on_start=NO and allow ntpd to > make a large step (-g without -q, or tinker panic 0). I don't remember > why I had sync on start disabled on most of my arm systems (probably a > one-time experiment that I forgot to undo and it got copied around), but > I suspect most people who don't have battery clocks will have it set to > yes, and that's why nobody else saw this problem. > > To me, the problem was mainly illustrative of how a tiny innocuous > change (ntpd making a series of ntp_adjtime() calls in a different, but > still correct, order than it used to) can expose a completely unexpected > longstanding bug in our code. Gotta wonder if any more of those are > lurking. :/ > > -- Ian > > > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > -- Tomoaki AOKI junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20150716215757.5dd13a04d134bba8ea290893>