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 
Trouble?  Email listmas...@chrony.tuxfamily.org.

Reply via email to