linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] net: stmmac: correct MAC propagation delay

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

Message-ID: <20230725203948.4037fee7@kernel.org>
Date:   Tue, 25 Jul 2023 20:39:48 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
Cc:     Johannes Zink <j.zink@...gutronix.de>,
        Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@...com>,
        Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>,
        Jose Abreu <joabreu@...opsys.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        patchwork-jzi@...gutronix.de, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel@...gutronix.de, kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] net: stmmac: correct MAC propagation delay

On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 20:22:53 -0700 Richard Cochran wrote:
> > any opinion on this one?  
> 
> Yeah, I saw it, but I can't get excited about drivers trying to
> correct delays.  I don't think this can be done automatically in a
> reliable way, and so I expect that the few end users who are really
> getting into the microseconds and nanoseconds will calibrate their
> systems end to end, maybe even patching out this driver nonsense in
> their kernels.
> 
> Having said that, I won't stand in the way of such driver stuff.
> After all, who cares about a few microseconds time error one way or
> the other?

I see :)