From: "Ray Lee" <ray-lk@madrabbit.org>
To: "Roman Zippel" <zippel@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: "john stultz" <johnstul@us.ibm.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>,
"Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove obsolete CLOCK_TICK_ADJUST
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 22:25:06 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2c0942db0802282225j7d01eee3vbe6bbb7b93e86e47@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0802290547320.2723@scrub.home>
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 8:49 PM, Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> Revert bbe4d18ac2e058c56adb0cd71f49d9ed3216a405 and
> e13a2e61dd5152f5499d2003470acf9c838eab84 and remove CLOCK_TICK_ADJUST
> completely. Add a optional kernel parameter ntp_tick_adj instead to allow
> adjusting of a large base drift and thus keeping ntpd happy.
Wait, so you're saying that something that the kernel correctly
figures out on its own today should instead be a kernel parameter,
with users having to supply it explicitly? Am I confused?
If I'm not confused, would you'd be so kind to explain to the peanut
gallery over here why this is a good thing?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-02-29 6:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-01-24 2:38 [PATCH] correct inconsistent ntp interval/tick_length usage john stultz
2008-01-24 9:14 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2008-01-25 14:07 ` Roman Zippel
2008-01-29 2:28 ` john stultz
2008-01-29 4:02 ` Roman Zippel
2008-01-30 2:14 ` john stultz
2008-01-31 1:55 ` Roman Zippel
2008-01-31 2:16 ` john stultz
2008-01-31 5:02 ` Roman Zippel
2008-02-02 1:02 ` John Stultz
2008-02-08 17:33 ` Roman Zippel
2008-02-09 2:17 ` john stultz
2008-02-09 4:47 ` Roman Zippel
2008-02-09 5:04 ` Andrew Morton
2008-02-09 14:13 ` Roman Zippel
2008-02-10 18:45 ` Roman Zippel
2008-02-12 0:09 ` john stultz
2008-02-12 14:36 ` Roman Zippel
2008-02-14 4:36 ` john stultz
2008-02-16 4:24 ` Roman Zippel
2008-02-19 1:02 ` john stultz
2008-02-19 4:04 ` Roman Zippel
2008-02-20 1:50 ` john stultz
2008-02-20 17:08 ` Roman Zippel
2008-02-22 2:39 ` john stultz
2008-02-25 14:44 ` Roman Zippel
2008-02-29 4:49 ` [PATCH] Remove obsolete CLOCK_TICK_ADJUST Roman Zippel
2008-02-29 6:25 ` Ray Lee [this message]
2008-02-29 13:31 ` Roman Zippel
2008-02-29 22:08 ` Andrew Morton
2008-02-29 22:27 ` Roman Zippel
2008-02-29 22:38 ` Andrew Morton
2008-02-29 23:11 ` john stultz
2008-02-29 23:11 ` john stultz
2008-03-02 4:03 ` Roman Zippel
2008-02-29 18:54 ` [PATCH] correct inconsistent ntp interval/tick_length usage Jörg-Volker Peetz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2c0942db0802282225j7d01eee3vbe6bbb7b93e86e47@mail.gmail.com \
--to=ray-lk@madrabbit.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=zippel@linux-m68k.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome