On Thu, Apr 03 2025 at 10:32, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 01, 2025 at 08:29:23PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> > 64 64 0.138
>>
>> That's weird as it only delays the update to the next tick.
>
> Ok, so it's not an instability of the clock, but rather an instability
> of the chronyd synchronization loop, which since kernel 4.19 expects
> the frequency to be applied as soon as the adjtimex call is finished.
Interesting.
>> Patch applies after reverting 757b000f7b93 ("timekeeping: Fix possible
>> inconsistencies in _COARSE clockids").
>
> I ran multiple longer tests to be able to compare the small values in
> the noise and yes, from the adjtimex point of view this seems to work
> as well as before the first COARSE fix. I didn't run any tests of the
> COARSE clock.
I did run those, but did not run the adjtimex() muck :)
