Yo Miroslav!
On Wed, 4 Mar 2015 09:24:33 +0100
Miroslav Lichvar mlich...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 11:44:47AM -0800, Gary E. Miller wrote:
Miroslav Lichvar mlich...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 12:38:41AM -0800, Gary E. Miller wrote:
First, why does chronyd
Greetings,
Just a pure shot in the dark, but how wide is your PPS pulse? It wouldn't
be 80mS would it? Like you are syncing to the trailing edge instead of the
leading edge?
-Dale
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 9:54 PM, Gary E. Miller g...@rellim.com wrote:
Yo Gary!
On Mon, 2 Mar 2015 15:39:23
On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 11:44:47AM -0800, Gary E. Miller wrote:
Miroslav Lichvar mlich...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 12:38:41AM -0800, Gary E. Miller wrote:
First, why does chronyd not support uSec SHM? (I usually use the
SOCK)
It does support both microsecond and
Miroslav Lichvar mlich...@redhat.com wrote:
The default precision of the SHM refclock in chrony is 1 microsecond,
it won't report jitter smaller than that. Add precision 1e-9 to the
SHM line in your chrony.conf to fix that.
Ah, that explains a lot. Will that fix the jitter computation?
On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 12:38:41AM -0800, Gary E. Miller wrote:
Ah, that explains a lot. Will that fix the jitter computation?
Yes, the +/- value in the chronyc sources output should be smaller
than 1 us now. It's mostly a cosmetic issue, it likely won't have any
noticeable effect on
Yo Miroslav!
On Tue, 3 Mar 2015 09:31:58 +0100
Miroslav Lichvar mlich...@redhat.com wrote:
Miroslav Lichvar mlich...@redhat.com wrote:
The default precision of the SHM refclock in chrony is 1
microsecond, it won't report jitter smaller than that. Add
precision 1e-9 to the SHM line in
Yo Miroslav!
On Tue, 3 Mar 2015 10:28:37 +0100
Miroslav Lichvar mlich...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 12:38:41AM -0800, Gary E. Miller wrote:
Ah, that explains a lot. Will that fix the jitter computation?
Yes, the +/- value in the chronyc sources output should be
Yo Miroslav!
On Fri, 27 Feb 2015 07:48:09 +0100
Miroslav Lichvar mlich...@redhat.com wrote:
One other tidbit is that I210 supports EEE, which can affect
jitter, although I wouldn't expect it on that level. You can try
turning this off via ethtool (ethtool --set-eee ethX eee off) to
Yo Matthew!
On Thu, 26 Feb 2015 21:16:21 +
Vick, Matthew matthew.v...@intel.com wrote:
One other tidbit is that I210 supports EEE, which can affect jitter,
although I wouldn't expect it on that level. You can try turning this
off via ethtool (ethtool --set-eee ethX eee off) to see if that
On Mon, 2015-03-02 at 15:39 -0800, Gary E. Miller wrote:
Yo Matthew!
On Thu, 26 Feb 2015 21:16:21 +
Vick, Matthew matthew.v...@intel.com wrote:
One other tidbit is that I210 supports EEE, which can affect jitter,
although I wouldn't expect it on that level. You can try turning this
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 01:31:33PM -0800, Gary E. Miller wrote:
This is the I210:
#x SHM2 0 4 377 8 -212ms[ -212ms] +/-
1000ns
This is a local reference clock over NTP
^* spidey.rellim.com 1 8 377 135+10us[ +14us] +/-
182us
On 2/26/15, 12:08 PM, Gary E. Miller g...@rellim.com wrote:
Yo Richard!
On Thu, 26 Feb 2015 10:08:05 +0100
Richard Cochran richardcoch...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 12:18:48AM -0800, Gary E. Miller wrote:
So the three I have on the recommmended list are not good? Yeah, I
Hi,
On Wed, 2015-02-25 at 16:48 -0800, Gary E. Miller wrote:
Yo Jacob E!
On Thu, 26 Feb 2015 00:32:27 +
Keller, Jacob E jacob.e.kel...@intel.com wrote:
Yea, in general all you really want is HWTSTAMP_FILTER_ALL, it's a
much better implementation.
So what is the minimmum for
13 matches
Mail list logo
