Re: CVS commit: src/sys/arch/cesfic

[Garrett D'Amore <garrett_damore%tadpole.com@localhost>]

Matthias Drochner wrote:
> garrett_damore%tadpole.com@localhost said:
>   
>> a) we have no way of knowing how long the system has been powered off.
>>  if you shut the system off for two weeks, then the root filesystem is
>> probably 2 weeks old! 
>>     
>
> Right, for local filesystems.
> I think the problem is not specific to any random port. It
> is just that the interface between filesystem and todr code
> doesn't tell about the quality of the time obtained. Up to
> now, md code could compensate for this at least partially,
> but the new mi code doesn't.
>   

Please propose a solution on tech-kern.  Its easy (now that we have an
MI layer) to improve it.

I still think even NFS time isn't necessarily good.  You don't know the
last time the filesystem being exported was touched...

    -- Garrett
>   
>> why is NFS the only
>> choice for a cesfic root filesystem?
>>     
>
> mfs should work too, but in practice there is better use for the RAM.
>
>   
>> I can see a case for making the system aware that root is over
>> an NFS server with a known good clock, and suppressing the warning in
>> that case
>>     
>
> I'd say the NFS server time is preferrable in almost every case.
>
> best regards
> Matthias
>   


-- 
Garrett D'Amore, Principal Software Engineer
Tadpole Computer / Computing Technologies Division,
General Dynamics C4 Systems
http://www.tadpolecomputer.com/
Phone: 951 325-2134  Fax: 951 325-2191