Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 10 Sep 2008 23:28:40 +0200 | From | Willy Tarreau <> | Subject | Re: Time travel experiment? |
| |
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 06:25:28PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote: > On Wednesday 10 September 2008, Frans Pop wrote: > > > > $ date > > > > Wed Jul 3 23:09:23 CEST 2024 > > > > > > Is this repeatable ? > > > > This wasn't the first suspend I've done today and I'd not seen it > > before. I'll follow up if it does repeat, but I thought it was strange > > and potentially important enough to at least report this occurrence. It > > might ring a bell with someone. > > Oops. Yes, it is repeatable. Just had the same occur again. > Not sure if I can trigger it reliably though or if it will still happen > after a reboot. > > The jump occurs at the same point and to almost the same time/date: > Sep 10 18:15:30 aragorn kernel: PM: Adding info for No Bus:vcs63 > Sep 10 18:15:30 aragorn kernel: PM: Adding info for No Bus:vcsa63 > Sep 10 18:15:30 aragorn kernel: wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:14:c1:38:e5:15 > Sep 10 18:15:30 aragorn kernel: wlan0: authenticated > Sep 10 18:15:30 aragorn kernel: wlan0: associate with AP 00:14:c1:38:e5:15 > Sep 10 18:15:30 aragorn kernel: wlan0: RX ReassocResp from 00:14:c1:38:e5:15 (capab=0x411 status=0 aid=1) > Sep 10 18:15:30 aragorn kernel: wlan0: associated > Sep 10 18:15:30 aragorn kernel: PM: Removing info for No Bus:vcs63 > Sep 10 18:15:30 aragorn kernel: PM: Removing info for No Bus:vcsa63 > Jul 3 23:09:01 aragorn kernel: wlan0: disassociating by local choice (reason=3) > Jul 3 23:09:03 aragorn kernel: wlan0: associate with AP 00:14:c1:38:e5:15 > Jul 3 23:09:03 aragorn kernel: wlan0: RX ReassocResp from 00:14:c1:38:e5:15 (capab=0x411 status=0 aid=1) > > One other thing with this last one. I had the system on AC this time, > which means the screensaver was active. It was running at a crazy speed > (much too fast). If I start the screensaver again now it runs at normal > speed.
Note that the time jump is 500 million seconds in the future (498977611 to be precise). I don't know if it is possible that some value running one unit has mistakenly been used in place of another one (eg: internal clock ticks instead of jiffies, etc...).
Willy
| |