From: Jean-Christian de Rivaz <jc@eclis.ch>
To: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dean@arctic.org
Subject: Re: NTP broken with 2.6.14
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2005 01:45:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <43695D94.10901@eclis.ch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1130976935.27168.512.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com>
john stultz a écrit :
> On Thu, 2005-11-03 at 00:37 +0100, Jean-Christian de Rivaz wrote:
>
>>john stultz a écrit :
>>
>>>On Thu, 2005-11-03 at 00:05 +0100, Jean-Christian de Rivaz wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Since I have installed the new kernel 2.6.14, ntpd is unable to
>>>>synchronize the time:
>>>
>>>
>>>I'm working to see if I can reproduce this. Is this with 2.6.14 vanilla,
>>>or from Linus' git tree post 2.6.14?
>>
>>This is a vanilla 2.6.14 kernel from Linus git tree.
>>The architecture is i386:
>>Linux talla 2.6.14 #1 PREEMPT Tue Nov 1 17:27:04 CET 2005 i686 GNU/Linux
>
>
> I can't seem to trivially reproduce this.
>
>
> Your ntpq associations output looks suspicious, though.
> ind assID status conf reach auth condition last_event cnt
> ===========================================================
> 1 14484 9014 yes yes none reject reachable 1
>
> That reject condition seems odd.
>
>
> What does running "ntpdate -uq <server>" produce?
First I have rebooted with a new kernel 2.6.14 that have the patch
pointed out by Dean Gaudet, this don't change the problem.
On the machine with 2.6.14:
talla:~# uname -a
Linux talla 2.6.14-1 #2 PREEMPT Thu Nov 3 00:54:44 CET 2005 i686 GNU/Linux
talla:~# ntpdate -uq 10.0.0.1
server 10.0.0.1, stratum 3, offset -14.893095, delay 0.02644
3 Nov 01:31:59 ntpdate[8186]: step time server 10.0.0.1 offset
-14.893095 sec
talla:~# ntpdate -uq 129.132.2.21
server 129.132.2.21, stratum 2, offset -14.907672, delay 0.04263
3 Nov 01:32:00 ntpdate[8187]: step time server 129.132.2.21 offset
-14.907672 sec
>
> Also, could you check 2.6.13, or even better do a binary search of
> mainline releases since 2.6.8 to narrow down where this broke for you?
On the others machines using the same server:
craie:~# uname -a
Linux craie 2.4.27-pre2-7-k7 #1 lun mai 17 00:08:15 CEST 2004 i686 GNU/Linux
craie:~# ntpdate -uq 10.0.0.1
server 10.0.0.1, stratum 3, offset 0.000046, delay 0.02641
3 Nov 01:31:38 ntpdate[16783]: adjust time server 10.0.0.1 offset
0.000046 sec
craie:~# ntpdate -uq 129.132.2.21
server 129.132.2.21, stratum 2, offset -0.013689, delay 0.04294
3 Nov 01:31:39 ntpdate[16786]: adjust time server 129.132.2.21 offset
-0.013689 sec
citron:~# uname -a
Linux citron 2.6.12-nfs-1 #1 Fri Jun 24 18:23:39 CEST 2005 i686 GNU/Linux
citron:~# ntpdate -uq 10.0.0.1
server 10.0.0.1, stratum 3, offset 0.003676, delay 0.02647
3 Nov 01:32:06 ntpdate[13476]: adjust time server 10.0.0.1 offset
0.003676 sec
citron:~# ntpdate -uq 129.132.2.21
server 129.132.2.21, stratum 2, offset -0.010485, delay 0.04341
3 Nov 01:32:11 ntpdate[13477]: adjust time server 129.132.2.21 offset
-0.010485 sec
So this could to be something after the 2.6.12. All machines run the
same version of ntpd and use the same configuration file.
Thanks,
--
Jean-Christian de Rivaz
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-11-03 0:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-11-02 23:05 NTP broken with 2.6.14 Jean-Christian de Rivaz
2005-11-02 23:21 ` john stultz
2005-11-02 23:37 ` Jean-Christian de Rivaz
2005-11-03 0:15 ` john stultz
2005-11-03 0:45 ` Jean-Christian de Rivaz [this message]
2005-11-03 1:07 ` john stultz
2005-11-03 2:26 ` Jean-Christian de Rivaz
2005-11-03 19:32 ` john stultz
2005-11-03 19:51 ` Lennart Sorensen
2005-11-03 20:11 ` john stultz
2005-11-03 20:48 ` Lennart Sorensen
2005-11-03 21:00 ` john stultz
2005-11-03 21:12 ` Lennart Sorensen
2005-11-03 21:28 ` Jean-Christian de Rivaz
2005-11-03 21:12 ` Jean-Christian de Rivaz
2005-11-03 21:41 ` john stultz
2005-11-03 22:10 ` Jean-Christian de Rivaz
2005-11-03 22:54 ` john stultz
2005-11-04 0:15 ` Jean-Christian de Rivaz
2005-11-04 0:40 ` john stultz
2005-11-04 2:50 ` Jean-Christian de Rivaz
2005-11-06 22:49 ` Hans-Peter Jansen
2005-11-07 21:44 ` Jean-Christian de Rivaz
2005-11-04 12:40 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2005-11-02 23:24 ` john stultz
2005-11-03 0:36 ` Roman Zippel
2005-11-03 1:13 ` Jean-Christian de Rivaz
2005-11-03 9:42 ` Roman Zippel
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-11-04 3:44 Brown, Len
2005-11-04 4:07 ` john stultz
2005-11-04 13:51 ` Lennart Sorensen
2005-11-04 16:39 ` Jean-Christian de Rivaz
2005-11-04 17:41 ` Jean-Christian de Rivaz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=43695D94.10901@eclis.ch \
--to=jc@eclis.ch \
--cc=dean@arctic.org \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox