Re: [ntpwg] Bug: Status/Summary of slashdot leap-second crash on new years 2008-2009

2009/1/6 Danny Mayer <mayer@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
Hi,

I don't know what this discussion is really about and why this was sent
to the working group in the middle of the discussion, but there is no
need for NTP to provide TAI information since NTP only uses UTC. Leap
Seconds are automatically signaled and incorporated when they become
due. If you don't have NTP running for some reason when a leap second is
signaled it doesn't matter since your server source will already have
incorporated the leap second so the NTP packet includes the timestamps
that include the leap second adjustment.

Operating Systems use UTC and not TAI by universal agreement and the
ones that don't are extremely rare.

Why don't you tell us what the real problem is instead of telling us
that you need TAI offset information?

Currently, the Linux kernel keeps time in UTC. This means
that it must take special actions to tick twice when a leap
second comes by. Due to a (stupid) bug, some fraction
of linux systems crashed; this includes everything from
laptops to servers, to DVR's, to cell phones and cell
phone towers. There's now a fix for this.

However, during the discussion, the idea came out that
maybe keeping UTC time in the kernel is just plain stupid.
So there's this idea floating around that maybe the kernel
should keep TAI time instead. The hope is that this will
reduce the complexity in the kernel, and push it out to
user space, "where it belongs" (to repeat a well-worn
mantra).

However, *if* we were to kick UTC out of the kernel,
and push it to user-land, then, of course, there's a
different problem: how does the kernel know what the
correct TAI time is? As your reply makes abundantly
clear, NTP is not a good source for TAI information.

The comments which you labelled as "non-sense" were
a mis-understanding of a discussion of a particular issue
that would arise if the kernel were to keep TAI -- if it did,
then user-space systems would need to have a reliable
source for leap-seconds. Since NTP does not
provide this, there was discussion about how that
could be worked-around. This then lead to the comment
that, "gee, wouldn't the right long-term solution be that
NTP provide TAI info?"

Clearly, it would be a lot of work to get the kernel to keep
TAI instead of UTC, so this is not, at this time, a "serious
proposal". But if it were possible, and all the various
little issues that result were solvable, then it does seem
like a better long-term solution.

--linas

p.s. the opinions above are not my own; I'm just
summarizing the points made by the most vocal
posters to this list.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Relevant Pages

  • Re: [ntpwg] Bug: Status/Summary of slashdot leap-second crash on new years 2008-2009
    ... need for NTP to provide TAI information since NTP only uses UTC. ... Operating Systems use UTC and not TAI by universal agreement and the ... the Linux kernel keeps time in UTC. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: Lep seconds
    ... if a client syncrhonizes to a server strictly running TAI ... and never signals leaps, NTP will deliver TAI. ... to continue with NTP on UTC. ... Both POSIX and NTP use UTC. ...
    (comp.protocols.time.ntp)
  • Re: Leap second functional question
    ... A few years ago the targets were Probabilistic Clock Synchronization, DECnet Time Service and NTP. ... If the radios deliver UTC, NTP runs on that and delivers the TAI Offset as available. ...
    (comp.protocols.time.ntp)
  • Re: Lep seconds
    ... Conversely, if a client syncrhonizes to a server strictly running TAI and never signals leaps, NTP will deliver TAI. ... USNO and I have discussed this serveral times and concluded the lessor of two evils is to continue with NTP on UTC. ... Actually, POSIX does *not* use UTC in the normal sense of the word, as no leap seconds are applied. ...
    (comp.protocols.time.ntp)
  • Re: basic questions about the leapsecond
    ... The NIST leap second file does not only ... difference between UTC and TAI. ... The NTP I have running, and which has been working fine since it was installed, is 4.2.0-a. ...
    (comp.protocols.time.ntp)