In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John Polstra writes: >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, >John Polstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, >> Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John Polstra writes: >> > >> > Can you try to MFC rev 1.111 and see if that changes anything ? >> >> That produced some interesting results. I am still testing under >> very heavy network interrupt load. With the change from 1.111, I >> still get the microuptime messages about as often. But look how >> much larger the reported backwards jumps are: >> >> microuptime() went backwards (896.225603 -> 888.463636) >> microuptime() went backwards (896.225603 -> 888.494440) >> microuptime() went backwards (896.225603 -> 888.500875) >> microuptime() went backwards (1184.392277 -> 1176.603001) >> microuptime() went backwards (1184.392277 -> 1176.603749) > >Another interesting thing is that the jumps are always 7.7x seconds >back -- usually 7.79 seconds. This is even true with more data points >from two different machines.
Yes, I noticed, but didn't dare draw conclusions based on two data points. This points to an arithmetic overflow (ie: point 3 in my previous email) -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
