lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 09:37:30 +0200 From: Paul Chavent <Paul.Chavent@...ra.fr> To: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com> CC: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>, Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, daniel.borkmann@....ee.ethz.ch, xemul@...allels.com, ebiederm@...ssion.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] net-packet: tx timestamping on tpacket ring On 04/14/2013 03:07 PM, Richard Cochran wrote: > On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 12:52:16PM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote: >> >> While going a bit more through the code, I'm wondering .. if we want to support >> TX timestamps, could we also support SW _and_ HW timestamps e.g. similar as in >> sock_recv_timestamp()? I'm asking, because we already allow setting the flags >> for it via sock_tx_timestamp(). This might be good, if possible. > > And while you are at it, you could also fix the receive code. > > As it stand now, it is fairly useless, since there is no way for user > space to tell which kind of time stamp has been reported. In fact, the > code will silently intermingle hardware and software time stamps. That > is surely a mean trick to play on the users. Isn't it the one that the user ask with setsockopt(fd, SOL_PACKET, PACKET_TIMESTAMP, ×tamping, sizeof(timestamping)) ? However, i wonder why you added an other sockopt that do the same thing as SOL_SOCKET/SO_TIMESTAMPING sockopt ? Paul. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists