On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 08:45:25AM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote: > > Bah. I tend to turn ntpd off and rely on the internal clock > > synchronization of the hypervisor. But fixing ntpd inside VMs would > > probably be a big win. > > Can you explain what you do? I have a vmt timedelta sensor that shows > host time, but how do you sync the openbsd clock to that? >
let the host sync the system clock and hope that it doesn't run off ... but you're right, having a working ntpd would be much better. > > I don't like the fact that it would require another button. Couldn't > > ntpd just detect this automatically? Maybe by detecting that it is > > running inside a VM, or by whatever else? > > I think there is resistance to anything that treats VM differently. I > tend to agree. This is a more generic problem of the clock failing to > keep up, and can affect real hardware as well. Can you freeze and continue any other non-VM system? Is it comparable with suspend/resume? If not, than it is a special case that could be handled without being scared about a "VM-specific" option. For example: The timedelta sensor could tell userland that it "might jump". ntpd would pick it up from vmt automatically. I think that adding another button is worse. It is already annoying to decide if I want to run ntpd with -s or not. Now it would add -j and -s. What combination is the best for my system? Who knows? Reyk
