Re: [PATCH 0/4] Extend Time Stamping

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Richard Cochran
Date: Tuesday, June 29, 2010 - 11:28 pm

On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 03:31:34PM -0700, David Miller wrote:

Okay, but what about the PHY time stamping hooks?

I anticipate that people will complain about the "performance penalty"
of these extra checks in a critical path.

Richard


static inline void phy_tx_timestamp(struct phy_device *phy, struct sk_buff *skb)
{
	union skb_shared_tx *shtx = skb_tx(skb);
	if (shtx->hardware && phy && phy->drv->txtstamp)
	   phy->drv->txtstamp(phy, skb);
}

static inline void phy_rx_timestamp(struct phy_device *phy, struct sk_buff *skb)
{
	if (phy && phy->drv->rxtstamp)
	   phy->drv->rxtstamp(phy, skb);
}

--
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:
[PATCH 0/4] Extend Time Stamping, Richard Cochran, (Mon Jun 28, 8:33 am)
[PATCH 1/4] net: add driver hooks for time stamping., Richard Cochran, (Mon Jun 28, 8:34 am)
Re: [PATCH 0/4] Extend Time Stamping, David Miller, (Tue Jun 29, 3:31 pm)
Re: [PATCH 0/4] Extend Time Stamping, David Miller, (Tue Jun 29, 10:37 pm)
Re: [PATCH 0/4] Extend Time Stamping, Richard Cochran, (Tue Jun 29, 11:28 pm)