Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 16 Dec 1999 13:39:18 -0700
From:      Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>
To:        Warner Losh <imp@village.org>
Cc:        Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Serious server-side NFS problem 
Message-ID:  <199912162039.NAA20890@mt.sri.com>
In-Reply-To: <199912162024.NAA73705@harmony.village.org>
References:  <16722.945365564@critter.freebsd.dk> <199912162024.NAA73705@harmony.village.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> : If people do a "settimeofday" we change the boot time since the
> : amount of time we've been up *IS* known for sure, whereas the boottime
> : is only an estimate.
> 
> There is one problem with this.  The amount of uptime isn't the same
> as the amount of time since the machine booted.  How can this happen?
> When a laptop suspends, it doesn't update the update while it is
> asleep, nor does it update the uptime by the amount of time that has
> been slept.

FWIW, we had code in the tree (just before the timeout_ch changes) that
did update all of the timeouts to 'fire' when the laptop was resumed.

This caused a 'thundering herd' problem at resume, but I don't see any
way around it...  However, it was lost when we changed to the different
timeout code.




Nate


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199912162039.NAA20890>