[LEAPSECS] Leap second smearing test results

[Richard Thomas]

Why not keep the system clock in TAI and fudge for UTC (smeared or not) only when there is a user request?

On Dec 20, 2016, at 9:32 PM, Steve Summit <scs+ls at eskimo.com> wrote:

> Zefram wrote:
>> ...the better way to implement the smear would be to shift it downstream:
>> clock synchronisation should be all unadulterated NTP handling the leap
>> as a leap, and the lying should happen later, probably where the client
>> ntp instances are steering their system clock.
> 
> I've been working -- painfully slowly -- on some kernel mods
> which keep true UTC in the kernel (accepting it from NTP), and do
> the smearing when user mode code asks for a time_t.  I'm not even
> adjusting the steering of the system clock; avoiding unnecessary
> perturbations there is part of the goal.
> _______________________________________________
> LEAPSECS mailing list
> LEAPSECS at leapsecond.com
> https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs