netdev - Re: [RFC 0/4] net: enable timestamps on a per-socket basis

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: <20080421.045122.239401136.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Mon, 21 Apr 2008 04:51:22 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	andi@...stfloor.org
Cc:	juhlenko@...mai.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	shemminger@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/4] net: enable timestamps on a per-socket basis

From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2008 13:43:31 +0200

> Are you sure they don't just need end2end timestamps as in from sendmsg
> to recvmsg()? Imagine the packet is stuck for some time in the
> kernel for whatever reason and you only process it later in user space
> wouldn't you consider that older time stamp "inaccurate" too? I would,
> unless I was debugging the network stack.

They need the exact timestamp when the packet was received at the
physical machine (and this pretty much means the network card) so that
they know precisely when customer X's trade order arrived for
scheduling and prioritizing purposes.

> It is hard to imagine they really care about excluding one set of queues
> (kernel queue) and not other queues (nic rx/tx queues, switch queues
> etc.) for their time stamps as you imply.

They do.
--
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