From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: "Mahesh Bandewar (महेश बंडेवार)" <maheshb@google.com>,
"David Laight" <David.Laight@aculab.com>
Cc: Netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Sagi Maimon <maimon.sagi@gmail.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>,
Mahesh Bandewar <mahesh@bandewar.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 next] ptp: update gettimex64 to provide ts optionally in mono-raw base.
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2024 02:24:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87edaxudr8.ffs@tglx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAF2d9jj6H+jOfUbbw1ZEHmgqroXmn+oFV8NwTyKJ_P_T4G_5xg@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Apr 22 2024 at 15:04, Mahesh Bandewar (महेश बंडेवार) wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 11:27 AM David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com> wrote:
>>
>> Isn't using CLOCK_REALTIME just a big bug?
>> As well as minor 'corrections' done by NTP it suffers from
>> major time-warps that can jump in either direction by arbitrary amounts.
>>
> Yes, this arbitrary jump in either direction is a problem and hence
> the proposed update. However, since it's a UAPI and there could be use
> cases that are happy with the current implementation, we can't break
> them. Of course the use case that I'm bringing in (and probably what
> you have in mind) differs but backward compatibility needs to be
> maintained.
It depends on what you are trying to do. You cannot adjust
CLOCK_REALTIME/TAI without knowing the current time, right?
So just declaring that this is a big bug and a problem is as wrong as it
gets. It's obviously not the right thing for all use cases, but that
makes the legitimate use cases not wrong.
>> This doesn't solve the problem of the NTP adjusted clock always
>> running slightly slow or fast.
>> The big NTP errors happen in the first (IIRC up to ~20 mins after boot)
>> when the system clock is being synchronised.
>
> Yes, a big step is a high possibility at the beginning (at boot) but
> smaller steps as well as ppm adjustments are real possibilities
> throughout and hence CLOCK_REALTIME and CLOCK_MONOTONIC are affected.
> By adding the timestamps in CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW (as proposed in this
> patch) should address this issue.
>
>> It really would be nice if those big adjustments didn't affect
>> CLOCK_MONATONIC. (as an example try sending RTP audio every 20ms)
They don't affect CLOCK_MONATONIC at all because there is no such clock :)
> Hmm, probably this is out of context for this patch and probably a
> question for the time maintainers / experts?
The quantity of the initial frequency adjustments depends on the
accuracy of the initial clock frequency calibration which is on most
sane systems within +/- 500ppm.
500ppm of 20ms == 10us
If the clock calibration is off by a larger margin then that needs to be
fixed.
It's clearly documented that CLOCK_MONOTONIC and CLOCK_REALTIME (and
therefore CLOCK_BOOTTIME and CLOCK_TAI) are strictly based on the same
frequency and only differ by offsets. So there is nothing to fix and
change.
Thanks,
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-23 0:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-18 4:27 [PATCHv2 next] ptp: update gettimex64 to provide ts optionally in mono-raw base Mahesh Bandewar
2024-04-19 1:55 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-04-19 22:14 ` Mahesh Bandewar (महेश बंडेवार)
2024-04-19 4:56 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-04-19 22:32 ` Mahesh Bandewar (महेश बंडेवार)
2024-04-21 18:27 ` David Laight
2024-04-22 22:04 ` Mahesh Bandewar (महेश बंडेवार)
2024-04-23 0:24 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2024-04-23 9:22 ` David Laight
2024-04-23 13:22 ` Thomas Gleixner
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=87edaxudr8.ffs@tglx \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=David.Laight@aculab.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=jstultz@google.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mahesh@bandewar.net \
--cc=maheshb@google.com \
--cc=maimon.sagi@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=richardcochran@gmail.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).