On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 6:45 PM, Doug Ledford <dledf...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> So no, I disagree that rough is fine for anything. >> I am sorry but the practical issues that we are dealing with in >> timekeeping today shows just the opposite. For a true comparison of clocks >> with nanosecond accuracy you would need time corrected values and that is >> a challenge due to the variances of the clocks that we see. > Jason's point, and one that isn't addressed yet, is that this might not > be variance in the clocks and instead might be a design flaw in the API > you are using and the way the clock speeds are passed to user space. > Changing from int MHz to int KHz might solve your problem. OK, so if we have the UAPI to pass the clock frequency in KHz that would put us in a better place? seems very much doable. Or. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
