linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] [RFC v3] packet: experimental support for 64-bit timestamps

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAF=yD-+vUygHhzDO4gBN9wdDOOZbMbjJ=Hsh-_SWEkFs2FSfDw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 29 Nov 2017 20:54:12 -0500
From:   Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
        Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...il.com>,
        Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Mike Maloney <maloney@...gle.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Hans Liljestrand <ishkamiel@...il.com>,
        Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>,
        "Rosen, Rami" <rami.rosen@...el.com>,
        "Reshetova, Elena" <elena.reshetova@...el.com>,
        Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@...cle.com>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC v3] packet: experimental support for 64-bit timestamps

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:39 PM, Willem de Bruijn
<willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:06 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:51 PM, Willem de Bruijn
>> <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com> wrote:
>>>> Thanks for the review! Any suggestions for how to do the testing? If you have
>>>> existing test cases, could you give my next version a test run to see if there
>>>> are any regressions and if the timestamps work as expected?
>>>>
>>>> I see that there are test cases in tools/testing/selftests/net/, but none
>>>> of them seem to use the time stamps so far, and I'm not overly familiar
>>>> with how it works in the details to extend it in a meaningful way.
>>>
>>> I could not find any good tests for this interface, either. The only
>>> user of the interface I found was a little tool I wrote a few years
>>> ago that compares timestamps at multiple points in the transmit
>>> path for latency measurement [1]. But it may be easier to just write
>>> a new test under tools/testing/selftests/net for this purpose. I can
>>> help with that, too, if you want.
>>
>> Thanks, that would be great!
>
> I'll reply to this thread with git send-email with an extension to
> tools/testing/selftests/net/psock_tpacket.c.

It appears that it did not end up in this thread. At least not when
using gmail threading. Patch at http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/842854/