Unruh wrote: > My key worry would be that on Linux, the kernel itself in > the adjtimex call imposes a 512PPM limit. (It has the > tickadj option to the adjtimex call which gives far > greater latitude-- 100000PPM, but also more complex > coding as you have to adjust both the tickadj and the > rate in that call.) Futhermore, the non-kernel route, > in which the rate is adjusted via the one second timer > interrupt is more difficult.
These seems relevant: Linux kernel 2.6.30-rc1 [RFC][PATCH] Adjust SHIFT_PLL to improve NTP convergence. <http://linux.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/Kernel/2009-05/msg01494.html> <http://linux.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/Kernel/2009-05/pngnvYEFgcXtV.png> <http://linux.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/Kernel/2009-05/pngfER6RopGcP.png> other articles refed: [PATCH] ntp: convert to the NTP4 reference model <http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=f19923937321244e7dc334767eb4b67e0e3d5c74> Re: 2.6.19 -mm merge plans (NTP changes) <http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0609.2/1348.html> <http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0609.3/0433.html> [ntp:hackers] Time constant too large? <https://lists.ntp.org/pipermail/hackers/2008-January/003487.html> -- E-Mail Sent to this address <blackl...@anitech-systems.com> will be added to the BlackLists. _______________________________________________ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
