On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 08:59:17PM -0800, Denny Page wrote:
> I tested with a usleep(100) following the sendmsg() call. This didn’t appear 
> to have any impact. Was the usleep() intended to influence the order of 
> timestamp vs. server response messages?

Yes, that was the idea. Could you try increasing the sleep interval to
1000 or maybe 10000? Anyway, I asked about this on the Intel
development list:

http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/intel-wired-lan/Week-of-Mon-20161114/007226.html

-- 
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.

Reply via email to