On Thu, Mar 27, 2025 at 06:32:27PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Thu, Mar 27 2025 at 16:42, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2025 at 10:22:31AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > To clearly see the difference with the new code, I made an attempt > > to update the old linux-tktest simulation that was used back when the > > multiplier adjustment was reworked, but there are too many missing > > things now and I gave up. > > Can you point me to that code?
It's this thing: https://github.com/mlichvar/linux-tktest > It would be probably useful to create a test mechanism which allows to > exercise all of this in a simulated way so we actually don't have to > wonder every time we change a bit what the consequences are. Yes, that would be very nice if we could run the timekeeping code in a deterministic simulated environment with a configurable clocksource, timing of kernel updates, timing and values of injected adjtimex() calls, etc. The question is how to isolate it. -- Miroslav Lichvar
