Harlan,
I'm uneasy calling random() for every read of the clock, as it could be
expensive. It seems a bit overkill to fuzz the nanobits when the caller
has timespec and fuzzed to 10 ms. Perhaps a test of precision greater
than a microsecond is advised.
Dave
Harlan Stenn wrote:
Dave,
Your patch handles the fuzz for gettimeofday() but not the case where some
OS implements getclock() or clock_gettime() badly.
What would be bad about moving the fuzz code after the #endif that closes
the "get time" routines and just fuzzing in all cases? If that is really
overkill for high-res systems, change the test from:
if (sys_precision != 0)
to
if ((sys_precision != 0) && (sys_precision > -7))
(for example).
H
--
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "David L. Mills" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
David> But, I finally punctured my skull about the precision measurement
David> method, which until now fuzzed the measurement. ...
David> So, the get_systime() routine in current ntp-dev has been changed to
David> fuzz the bits only after calibration and to fuzz all the
David> nonsignificant bits less than the measured precision.
_______________________________________________
questions mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
