RE: [RFC PATCH 00/13] hardware time stamping + igb example implementation

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Ohly, Patrick
Date: Thursday, November 13, 2008 - 8:53 am

Oliver Hartkopp wrote:

For reasons that have been mentioned already here (some hardware can
time stamp every packet, new use cases) I think it would be important
to have the hwtstamp information right in the skb. I can change the
patch series so that it uses one additional ktime_t hwtstamp field; give
me a few days, I'm currently traveling.


I'm not a friend of a config option because it was suggested that
hardware tstamps should off on *standard* kernels. That's of little
use for users of unmodified distributions who want to run PTP.

If the feature is only disabled on special distributions, then I really
don't mind, but at the same time I wonder whether these distributions
are performance sensitive enough to care about the additional field.

Bye, Patrick
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[RFC PATCH 08/13] igb: stub support for SIOCSHWTSTAMP, Patrick Ohly, (Fri Oct 31, 5:21 am)
RE: [RFC PATCH 00/13] hardware time stamping + igb example ..., Ohly, Patrick, (Thu Nov 13, 8:53 am)