Rob,
Your comment makes no sense. The actual code implemented from my design
was tested in Solaris and also in FreeBSD. In both cases the tests
confirmed the behavior described previously. I have not tested it in
Linux. If it performs other than as I described, the port is broken.
Dave
Rob
David L. Mills wrote:
> Rob,
>
> With due respect, I don't think you know what you are talking about.
Read it again. I don't question your design, I question your claims
that the code implements the design which are upheld even when the
contrary is shown in observations.
Even when your design is
Rob,
With due respect, I don't think you know what you are talking about. The
original discipline loop described in rfd1305 was refined as described
in my 1995 paper and further refined over the years since then. For each
and every refinement a series of tests, both in simulation and in situ,
Miroslav,
Exactly as expected. The overshoot exceeds the design limit of 10
percent by as much as 40 percent. That's exactly what the design is
intended to avoid
Dave
Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 10:00:06PM +, David L. Mills wrote:
The change in SHIFT_PLL would r
Miroslav,
You have not revealed the result of the experiment I suggested, so I
don't know whether the Linux kernel performs as expected with the
original design parameters.
I think we are done with this discussion. The kernel discipline loop is
conservatively designed according to sound engi
Once upon a time, Rob said:
>So I agree with you that it never hurts to test something that theory
>has already proved to be correct.
The short-hand description for that is that in theory, practice and
theory are the same, but in practice, they are different.
--
Chris Adams
Systems and Network
Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 10:00:06PM +, David L. Mills wrote:
>> Is there somebody around here that understands feedback control
>> theory? You are doing extreme violence to determine a really simple
>> thing, the discipline loop impulse response. There is a much simple
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 10:00:06PM +, David L. Mills wrote:
> The change in SHIFT_PLL would result
> in unstable behavior below 5 (32 s), as well as serious transients
> if the discipline shifts from the daemon to the kernel and back. All
> feedback loops become unstable unless the time constan
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 10:00:06PM +, David L. Mills wrote:
> Is there somebody around here that understands feedback control
> theory? You are doing extreme violence to determine a really simple
> thing, the discipline loop impulse response. There is a much simpler
> way.
It was a demonstrati
me...@whoi.edu wrote:
>
> I am looking at the shared memory structure and code used by NTP and was
> wondering if I could get some guidance on these values. The big question is
> how NTP uses the clockTime vs the receiveTime.
Get the sourcecode package of NTP.
There is documentation in there, an
10 matches
Mail list logo
