On Mon, 2012-06-18 at 18:28 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 02:55:11PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > On Sun, 2012-06-17 at 19:34 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote: > > > The offset should change upon entering state OOP, so something like > > > the following (untested) patch should fix it for 3.2.9. > > [...] > > > > It looks like this patch just changes the offset reported by adjtimex() > > during an inserted second; is that right? > > Right, nothing really terrible will happen. The worst that I can > imagine is that ntpd will set the new TAI offset during OOP, and then > the kernel will add one to it, resulting in the TAI offset being off > by one. > > But I really doubt any software makes use of this information. > > > Other than that, is 3.2.y likely to be OK? Is there a good way to test > > that in advance; does > > <http://codemonkey.org.uk/2012/06/15/testing-leap-code/> look > > reasonable? > > Well, if you want to wait all night then that is one way to do it.
I was intending to change the clock too... > Here is a little test program I have been using: > > https://github.com/richardcochran/leap Thanks, that runs without incident but does show the incorrect offset during OOP. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings If more than one person is responsible for a bug, no one is at fault.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
