On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 10:47:52AM -0800, Denny Page wrote: > I’m not sure I understand what effect a delay in NIO_Linux_RequestTxTimestamp > would have. That I see, NIO_Linux_RequestTxTimestamp builds a control message > structure but does not make any level 2 calls. Introducing a delay here > should be the same as introducing a delay one level up in NIO_SendPacket. > Either way, this is before the call to sendmsg(), so the only effect I see is > that the original message to the server is delayed by 100us. I don’t > understand how this would affect the timing of the server response message, > or the timestamp message. Is there something that I’m missing?
No, you are right. usleep() should be called after sendmsg(), e.g. in NIO_SendPacket(). I was thinking it would be a Linux-specific hack, but this is a wrong place for it. -- Miroslav Lichvar -- To unsubscribe email chrony-dev-requ...@chrony.tuxfamily.org with "unsubscribe" in the subject. For help email chrony-dev-requ...@chrony.tuxfamily.org with "help" in the subject. Trouble? Email listmas...@chrony.tuxfamily.org.
