comp.protocols.time.ntp
Affichage de l'article :
Re: Linux 11-minute mode (RTC update)

Date : Le 04 avril 2008
From : Noob
Sujet : Re: Linux 11-minute mode (RTC update)

Serge Bets wrote:

> Noob wrote:
>
>> STA_UNSYNC (0x0040, clock unsynchronized) is 0. [...] Thus the kernel
>> should write the system time to the RTC every 11 minutes; but it does
>> not.
>
> Fine! Don't touch anything, happy man, or it might well "tomber en
> marche".

Hello Serge, I was hoping you'd comment!

If I don't want the kernel to update the RTC, I can always undef
CONFIG_GENERIC_CMOS_UPDATE.

> Real men don't want the eleven-minutes mode.

:-)

> It is not only extremely inaccurate by itself, but it also steps on
> the toes of those tools that are able to manage the RTC properly.

Our equipment is supposed to run 24/7 for months / years.
I need to keep the RTC synchronized, in case of power failure.

Do you believe that running hwclock --systohc periodically is better
than using the kernel's 11-minute mode?

> I previously posted some figures, comparing the accuracy of writing the
> RTC (not counting drift). Mean offset and dispersion:
>
> - eleven-minutes mode: -2150 µs +-5000
> - hwclock util-linux-ng 2.13.1: -2500 µs +-170
> - hwclock 2.32 from BJH: 0 µs +-10

Point taken.

( I use http://giraffe-data.com/software/about_hwclock.html )

If I use hwclock to update the RTC, how often should I do it?

What do you think about the following script?

while true
do
sleep 660 # or some other value?
hwclock --utc --systohc
done

> Furthermore both hwclocks are able to evaluate and compensate the drift
> of the RTC. The eleven-minutes mode cannot do that, and instead it can
> perturbate hwclock's calculations.

Is the crystal of the RTC supposed to be more stable than the crystal
of the CPU?

Regards.

Posez vos questions, réponses et remarques sur les forums de FrameIP