[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1505747685.29839.19.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 08:14:45 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Richard Cochran <rcochran@...utronix.de>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org,
Andre Guedes <andre.guedes@...el.com>,
Anna-Maria Gleixner <anna-maria@...utronix.de>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Henrik Austad <henrik@...tad.us>,
Jesus Sanchez-Palencia <jesus.sanchez-palencia@...el.com>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V1 net-next 2/6] net: skbuff: Add a field to support
time based transmission.
On Mon, 2017-09-18 at 09:41 +0200, Richard Cochran wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Richard Cochran <rcochran@...utronix.de>
> ---
> include/linux/skbuff.h | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
Why skb->tstamp can not be used ?
AFAIK, fact that it might be overwritten by packet captures should not hurt.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists