Hi, I won't write too much, the following session will tell much more: % jarjarbinks:root# ntpdate -b chronos.cru.fr % 29 May 17:08:44 ntpdate[4254]: step time server 195.220.94.163 offset 0.000273 sec % jarjarbinks:root# sysctl kern.timecounter.hardware % kern.timecounter.hardware: ACPI-fast % jarjarbinks:root# while : ; do date ; sleep 1 ; done % Mon May 29 17:08:56 CEST 2006 % Mon May 29 17:09:03 CEST 2006 % Mon May 29 17:09:09 CEST 2006 % Mon May 29 17:09:16 CEST 2006 % Mon May 29 17:09:22 CEST 2006 % ^C % jarjarbinks:root# ntpdate -b chronos.cru.fr % 29 May 17:09:32 ntpdate[4266]: step time server 195.220.94.163 offset 0.000937 sec % jarjarbinks:root# sysctl kern.timecounter.hardware=TSC % kern.timecounter.hardware: ACPI-fast -> TSC % jarjarbinks:root# while : ; do date ; sleep 1 ; done % Mon May 29 17:09:41 CEST 2006 % Mon May 29 17:09:42 CEST 2006 % Mon May 29 17:09:43 CEST 2006 % Mon May 29 17:09:44 CEST 2006 % Mon May 29 17:09:45 CEST 2006 % ^C % jarjarbinks:root# ntpdate -b chronos.cru.fr % 29 May 17:10:16 ntpdate[4278]: step time server 195.220.94.163 offset 29.503343 sec I know this is a FAQ when CPU frequency throttling is used, but this is not the case here. I killed powerd(8) and dev.cpu.0.freq is set to its highest frequency (1733). IOW, using ACPI-fast as timecounter leads to have "sleep 1" actually sleep for 6~7 seconds. Using TSC as timecounter is even weirder since it desynchronize the computer's clock. I attached the dmesg of my computer, and can provide verbose dmesg if need, or anything else requested to help debugging. Thank you. Regards, -- Jeremie Le Hen < jeremie at le-hen dot org >< ttz at chchile dot org >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:56 UTC