Re: sys_fuzz

Yo Eric! On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 21:54:13 -0500 "Eric S. Raymond" wrote: > > Thus the need to not trust the clock and the need for > > normalize_time() > > Sure. But if my new understanding is correct, all *this* problem > requires is stepback protection, not fuzzing. Please

Re: sys_fuzzMime-Version: 1.0

Yo Fred! On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 18:48:43 -0800 (PST) Fred Wright wrote: > > > If one is dithering, the amount of dither should be based on the > > > clock's actual resolution, *not* the time required to read it. > > > In a sampled system, one would add dither equal to the > > >

Re: sys_fuzz

Gary E. Miller : > > You have no choice but to fuzz the clock, > > I think you went a tad too far. Your other choice, like > CLOCK_MONOTONIC, is to just add a tiny value (a nano Sec) if it would > be a repeat. Thanks for the correction. > > All x86 machines back to the Pentium

Re: sys_fuzzMime-Version: 1.0

On Tue, 24 Jan 2017, Gary E. Miller wrote: > On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 15:22:20 -0800 (PST) > Fred Wright wrote: > > If one is dithering, the amount of dither should be based on the > > clock's actual resolution, *not* the time required to read it. In a > > sampled system, one

Re: sys_fuzzMime-Version: 1.0

Hal Murray : > > g...@rellim.com said: > > Makes no sense to me. Adding randomness helps when you have hysteresis, > > stiction, friction, lash and some other things, but none of those apply to > > NTP. > > The NTP case is roughly stiction. Remember the age of this

Re: sys_fuzzMime-Version: 1.0

Yo Fred! On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 15:22:20 -0800 (PST) Fred Wright wrote: > On Tue, 24 Jan 2017, Gary E. Miller wrote: > > > Last week we had a discussion on sys_fuzz and the value of adding > > random noise to some measurements. The code defi2nes sys_fuzz asL > > > > "* The

Re: Big endian success

Yo Sanjeev! On Wed, 25 Jan 2017 07:28:52 +0800 Sanjeev Gupta wrote: > > > > I have been asking OSUOSL for more horsepower. > > > > > > I can provide a more "hefty" box. 4GB RAM, 4-core VM? Or more? > > > > I would need ssh access, install buildbot and run a web server on

Re: Big endian success

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 3:52 AM, Gary E. Miller wrote: > > > > > I have been asking OSUOSL for more horsepower. > > > > I can provide a more "hefty" box. 4GB RAM, 4-core VM? Or more? > > I would need ssh access, install buildbot and run a web server on it. On its way to you.

Re: sys_fuzzMime-Version: 1.0

On Tue, 24 Jan 2017, Gary E. Miller wrote: > Last week we had a discussion on sys_fuzz and the value of adding > random noise to some measurements. The code defi2nes sys_fuzz asL > > "* The sys_fuzz variable measures the minimum time to read the system > * clock, regardless of its

Re: sys_fuzz

Yo Hal! On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 14:40:13 -0800 Hal Murray wrote: > g...@rellim.com said: > > You gotta squint real hard to see that as stiction, but not worth=20 > > debating the proper word. So it may have mattered back then, but > > do we need to carry this legacy code.

Re: ✘sys_fuzz * ntp_random()

Yo Eric! On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 16:42:42 -0500 "Eric S. Raymond" wrote: > Achim Gratz : > > You might have enough other noise in any particular system so the > > sys_fuzz (which whitens the quantization noise on the clock reading) > > doesn't make a difference

Re: sys_fuzzMime-Version: 1.0

Yo Hal! On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 13:46:59 -0800 Hal Murray wrote: > g...@rellim.com said: > > Makes no sense to me. Adding randomness helps when you have > > hysteresis, stiction, friction, lash and some other things, but > > none of those apply to NTP. > > The NTP case

Re: ✘sys_fuzz * ntp_random()

Yo Eric! On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 15:44:17 -0500 "Eric S. Raymond" wrote: > Gary E. Miller : > > Otherwise sys_fuzz * ntp_random() is more poinltess noise in the > > code we can rip out. > > I would consider this good news, especially since that code is in the >

Re: sys_fuzzMime-Version: 1.0

g...@rellim.com said: > Makes no sense to me. Adding randomness helps when you have hysteresis, > stiction, friction, lash and some other things, but none of those apply to > NTP. The NTP case is roughly stiction. Remember the age of this code. It was working long before CPUs had

Re: ✘sys_fuzz * ntp_random()

Gary E. Miller : > Otherwise sys_fuzz * ntp_random() is more poinltess noise in the code we > can rip out. I would consider this good news, especially since that code is in the critical section. -- http://www.catb.org/~esr/;>Eric S. Raymond signature.asc

✘sys_fuzz * ntp_random()

Yo All! Last week we had a discussion on sys_fuzz and the value of adding random noise to some measurements. The code defi2nes sys_fuzz asL "* The sys_fuzz variable measures the minimum time to read the system * clock, regardless of its precision." Rondomness of half the sys_fuzz is

Re: PYTHONPATH follies

e...@thyrsus.com said: > There are two different possible assumptions about where Python user > libraries should be installed. If the sys.path in your Python installation > makes the same assumption as waf, all is good. If not, waf lands our > libries in the wrong place and you have to set