Re: 2.6.10-rc3 vs clock

Re: 2.6.10-rc3 vs clock

[Sid Boyce]

I'm seeing uptime 11:26pm  up 1 day 13:30 and my clock is around 190 
secs fast, I don't know if this happened only at 2.6.10-rc3, but that's 
when I noticed it on this XP3000+. On the x86_64 laptop also with 
2.6.10-rc3, it's bang on time in uptime 5 days 2:11.
Regards
Sid.
-- 
Sid Boyce .... Hamradio G3VBV and keen Flyer
=====LINUX ONLY USED HERE=====

Re: 2.6.10-rc3 vs clock

[Gene Heskett]

On Monday 13 December 2004 18:30, Sid Boyce wrote:
>I'm seeing uptime 11:26pm  up 1 day 13:30 and my clock is around 190
>secs fast, I don't know if this happened only at 2.6.10-rc3, but
> that's when I noticed it on this XP3000+. On the x86_64 laptop also
> with 2.6.10-rc3, it's bang on time in uptime 5 days 2:11.
>Regards
>Sid.

I've been playng with the tickadj command, and am currently set
at 9926, default is 10,000.  And I'm keeping pretty good time now.
Running ntpdate in slew the clock mode, once per hour, I'm
logging this now:
Dec 13 12:35:03 coyote ntpdate[26529]: adjust time server
140.142.16.34 offset 0.043227 sec
Dec 13 13:35:01 coyote ntpdate[27572]: adjust time server
18.145.0.30 offset 0.248119 sec
Dec 13 14:35:05 coyote ntpdate[28624]: adjust time server
204.123.2.72 offset 0.156707 sec
Dec 13 15:35:03 coyote ntpdate[29486]: adjust time server
198.30.92.2 offset 0.245309 sec
Dec 13 16:35:04 coyote ntpdate[30400]: adjust time server
164.67.62.194 offset 0.105258 sec
Dec 13 17:35:01 coyote ntpdate[31320]: adjust time server
130.207.244.240 offset 0.036849 sec
Dec 13 18:35:01 coyote ntpdate[32229]: adjust time server
18.145.0.30 offset 0.254626 sec
Dec 13 19:35:10 coyote ntpdate[741]: adjust time server
198.30.92.2 offset 0.276145 sec
Dec 13 20:35:02 coyote ntpdate[1858]: adjust time server
128.252.19.1 offset 0.151181 sec

So while its not perfect, its adequate.

As to whats doing it, I have NDI.

-- 
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.30% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Yahoo.com attorneys please note, additions to this message
by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2004 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.

Re: 2.6.10-rc3 vs clock

[Sid Boyce]

Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Monday 13 December 2004 18:30, Sid Boyce wrote:
> 
>>I'm seeing uptime 11:26pm  up 1 day 13:30 and my clock is around 190
>>secs fast, I don't know if this happened only at 2.6.10-rc3, but
>>that's when I noticed it on this XP3000+. On the x86_64 laptop also
>>with 2.6.10-rc3, it's bang on time in uptime 5 days 2:11.
>>Regards
>>Sid.
> 
> 
> I've been playng with the tickadj command, and am currently set
> at 9926, default is 10,000.  And I'm keeping pretty good time now.
> Running ntpdate in slew the clock mode, once per hour, I'm
> logging this now:
> Dec 13 12:35:03 coyote ntpdate[26529]: adjust time server
> 140.142.16.34 offset 0.043227 sec
> Dec 13 13:35:01 coyote ntpdate[27572]: adjust time server
> 18.145.0.30 offset 0.248119 sec
> Dec 13 14:35:05 coyote ntpdate[28624]: adjust time server
> 204.123.2.72 offset 0.156707 sec
> Dec 13 15:35:03 coyote ntpdate[29486]: adjust time server
> 198.30.92.2 offset 0.245309 sec
> Dec 13 16:35:04 coyote ntpdate[30400]: adjust time server
> 164.67.62.194 offset 0.105258 sec
> Dec 13 17:35:01 coyote ntpdate[31320]: adjust time server
> 130.207.244.240 offset 0.036849 sec
> Dec 13 18:35:01 coyote ntpdate[32229]: adjust time server
> 18.145.0.30 offset 0.254626 sec
> Dec 13 19:35:10 coyote ntpdate[741]: adjust time server
> 198.30.92.2 offset 0.276145 sec
> Dec 13 20:35:02 coyote ntpdate[1858]: adjust time server
> 128.252.19.1 offset 0.151181 sec
> 
> So while its not perfect, its adequate.
> 
> As to whats doing it, I have NDI.
> 
Thanks, I set it to 9942 and checking with ptktime and it's looking 
good, before it was drifting by 3 seconds by this time - with 9926 it 
was losing slightly, 2 secs in about 5 minutes. On the laptops and the 
Mandrake box that are rock solid it is set at 10,000, the P-II/333 
laptop is using the SuSE 9.2 kernel and the others are on 2.6.10-rc3.
Regards
Sid.
-- 
Sid Boyce .... Hamradio G3VBV and keen Flyer
=====LINUX ONLY USED HERE=====

Re: 2.6.10-rc3 vs clock

[Sid Boyce]

Bill Davidsen wrote:
Gene Heskett wrote:

 >>    At -rc2 my clock kept fairly decent time, but -rc3 is running 
fast, about 30 seconds an hour fast.
 >>
 >>    I've been using ntpdate, is that now officially deprecated?

 > Running ntpd used to keep the clock dead on, now my 2.6 systems all 
drift one way or the other. I suspect that the system calls used by ntpd 
 > have changed somehow, but until I find the time to look harder I 
can't > say that except as conjecture.
 >
 > The sad thing is that most of the systems have quite good hardware 
clocks...

Gene Heskett suggested I play around with tickadj and I found that a 
value of 9962 on this SuSE 9.2/XP3000+ has kept it rock solid over the 
last 4 days. On the x86_64 laptop with XP3000+-Mobile, it's never been 
out, both of them running 2.6.10-rc3 and using ntpd to keep in step. On 
the other box with Mandrake 10.1/XP2800+ and 2.6.10-rc3, I had to set it 
to 9958. Something has definitely changed with 2.6.10-rc3.
Regards
Sid.
-- 
Sid Boyce .... Hamradio G3VBV and keen Flyer
=====LINUX ONLY USED HERE=====

Re: 2.6.10-rc3 vs clock

[Gene Heskett]

On Friday 17 December 2004 19:06, Sid Boyce wrote:
>Bill Davidsen wrote:
>
>Gene Heskett wrote:
>
>clocks...
>
>Gene Heskett suggested I play around with tickadj and I found that a
>value of 9962 on this SuSE 9.2/XP3000+ has kept it rock solid over
> the last 4 days. On the x86_64 laptop with XP3000+-Mobile, it's
> never been out, both of them running 2.6.10-rc3 and using ntpd to
> keep in step. On the other box with Mandrake 10.1/XP2800+ and
> 2.6.10-rc3, I had to set it to 9958. Something has definitely
> changed with 2.6.10-rc3.
>Regards
>Sid.

Thats not as far off as I was here Sid. I have to use 9926 on this
box, an XP2800 athlon with a gig of ram, and high mem turned on.

And your quoting mechanism in that MTA is broken Sid. :)

-- 
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.30% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Yahoo.com attorneys please note, additions to this message
by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2004 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.

Re: 2.6.10-rc3 vs clock

[Sid Boyce]

Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Friday 17 December 2004 19:06, Sid Boyce wrote:
> 
>>Bill Davidsen wrote:
>>
>>Gene Heskett wrote:
>>
>>clocks...
>>
>>Gene Heskett suggested I play around with tickadj and I found that a
>>value of 9962 on this SuSE 9.2/XP3000+ has kept it rock solid over
>>the last 4 days. On the x86_64 laptop with XP3000+-Mobile, it's
>>never been out, both of them running 2.6.10-rc3 and using ntpd to
>>keep in step. On the other box with Mandrake 10.1/XP2800+ and
>>2.6.10-rc3, I had to set it to 9958. Something has definitely
>>changed with 2.6.10-rc3.
>>Regards
>>Sid.
> 
> 
> Thats not as far off as I was here Sid. I have to use 9926 on this
> box, an XP2800 athlon with a gig of ram, and high mem turned on.
> 
> And your quoting mechanism in that MTA is broken Sid. :)
> 

Quoting was done manually as I am not subscribed.
Regards
Sid.
-- 
Sid Boyce .... Hamradio G3VBV and keen Flyer
=====LINUX ONLY USED HERE=====

Re: 2.6.10-rc3 vs clock

[Gene Heskett]

On Friday 17 December 2004 21:38, Sid Boyce wrote:
>Gene Heskett wrote:
>> On Friday 17 December 2004 19:06, Sid Boyce wrote:
[...]
>> And your quoting mechanism in that MTA is broken Sid. :)
>
>Quoting was done manually as I am not subscribed.
>Regards
>Sid.

That shouldn't have a thing to do with the quoting, Sid.
You are using Mozilla ThunderBird so I don't know where thats
controlled.  KMail has a checkmark box under composer>general, and
the next tab lets you change the character.

-- 
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.30% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Yahoo.com attorneys please note, additions to this message
by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2004 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.

2.6.10-rc3 vs clock

[Gene Heskett]

At -rc2 my clock kept fairly decent time, but -rc3 is running fast, 
about 30 seconds an hour fast.

I've been using ntpdate, is that now officially deprecated?

-- 
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.30% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Yahoo.com attorneys please note, additions to this message
by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2004 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.

Re: 2.6.10-rc3 vs clock

[john stultz]

On Sat, 2004-12-04 at 08:11, Gene Heskett wrote:
> At -rc2 my clock kept fairly decent time, but -rc3 is running fast, 
> about 30 seconds an hour fast.

Hmm. Could you send me your dmesg output from both rc2 and rc3 boots?

thanks
-john

Re: 2.6.10-rc3 vs clock

[David Weinehall]

On Sat, Dec 04, 2004 at 11:11:16AM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
> At -rc2 my clock kept fairly decent time, but -rc3 is running fast, 
> about 30 seconds an hour fast.

Lucky you. Each time I suspend my laptop the clock speeds up
approximately x2...  Usually, the time it takes me to get from home to
work means that the computer tells me I arrived half an hour late...

> I've been using ntpdate, is that now officially deprecated?

I kind of doubt that...


Regards: David Weinehall
-- 
 /) David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /) Northern lights wander      (\
//  Maintainer of the v2.0 kernel   //  Dance across the winter sky //
\)  http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/    (/   Full colour fire           (/

Re: 2.6.10-rc3 vs clock

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Monday 13 of December 2004 13:29, David Weinehall wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 04, 2004 at 11:11:16AM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > At -rc2 my clock kept fairly decent time, but -rc3 is running fast, 
> > about 30 seconds an hour fast.
> 
> Lucky you. Each time I suspend my laptop the clock speeds up
> approximately x2...  Usually, the time it takes me to get from home to
> work means that the computer tells me I arrived half an hour late...

I see something strange that may be related to these issues.  When I turn off 
my box and turn it on again after a couple of hours, and run Linux, the clock 
is apparently late, although it shows the right time in the CMOS setup right 
before booting the kernel.  The amount of time the clock is late (in Linux) 
depends on how much time the box has been off (it increases about 4 min. for 
each hour, so the clock is about 30 min. late if the box has been off for 8 
hours).

This has been present on all kernels since 2.6.8 at least (I did not run 
earlier kernels on this box), but I haven't tried 2.6.10-rc3-mm1 yet.

> > I've been using ntpdate, is that now officially deprecated?
> 
> I kind of doubt that...

Me too. ;-)

Greets,
RJW

-- 
- Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?
- That depends a good deal on where you want to get to.
		-- Lewis Carroll "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland"

Re: 2.6.10-rc3 vs clock

[Gene Heskett]

On Monday 13 December 2004 09:04, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>On Monday 13 of December 2004 13:29, David Weinehall wrote:
>> On Sat, Dec 04, 2004 at 11:11:16AM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> > At -rc2 my clock kept fairly decent time, but -rc3 is running
>> > fast, about 30 seconds an hour fast.
>>
>> Lucky you. Each time I suspend my laptop the clock speeds up
>> approximately x2...  Usually, the time it takes me to get from
>> home to work means that the computer tells me I arrived half an
>> hour late...
>
>I see something strange that may be related to these issues.  When I
> turn off my box and turn it on again after a couple of hours, and
> run Linux, the clock is apparently late, although it shows the
> right time in the CMOS setup right before booting the kernel.  The
> amount of time the clock is late (in Linux) depends on how much
> time the box has been off (it increases about 4 min. for each hour,
> so the clock is about 30 min. late if the box has been off for 8
> hours).
>
>This has been present on all kernels since 2.6.8 at least (I did not
> run earlier kernels on this box), but I haven't tried
> 2.6.10-rc3-mm1 yet.

This is not something I've noted, but then this box is only shut off
to blow the dirt out and clean & regrease the flower on the cpu at
about 6 month intervals.

>> > I've been using ntpdate, is that now officially deprecated?
>>
>> I kind of doubt that...
>
>Me too. ;-)
>
>Greets,
>RJW

-- 
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.30% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Yahoo.com attorneys please note, additions to this message
by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2004 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.

Re: 2.6.10-rc3 vs clock

[Bill Davidsen]

Gene Heskett wrote:
> At -rc2 my clock kept fairly decent time, but -rc3 is running fast, 
> about 30 seconds an hour fast.
> 
> I've been using ntpdate, is that now officially deprecated?
> 
Running ntpd used to keep the clock dead on, now my 2.6 systems all 
drift one way or the other. I suspect that the system calls used by ntpd 
have changed somehow, but until I find the time to look harder I can't 
say that except as conjecture.

The sad thing is that most of the systems have quite good hardware clocks...

-- 
    -bill davidsen (davidsen@tmr.com)
"The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
  last possible moment - but no longer"  -me