[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <487BA1B8.5070006@hartkopp.net>
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 20:58:00 +0200
From: Oliver Hartkopp <oliver@...tkopp.net>
To: Octavian Purdila <opurdila@...acom.com>
CC: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [rfc] new sk_buff member: hwstamp
Octavian Purdila wrote:
>> However i feel, that *one* nanosec resolution timestamp (as it already
>> exists inside the skbuff) is enough. AFAIK the timestamp is only set in
>> the netif_rx(), when it is not already set by the driver itself. For
>> that reason i would suggest to create some semi-intelligent offset
>> calculation inside the driver that makes the skb->tstamp value
>> correspond with the hw timestamp and therefore transports the high
>> resolution timestamp requirement into the userspace.
>>
>>
>
> You mean something like here [1] ?
> [1]
> http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.23-rc4/2.6.23-rc4-mm1/broken-out/sky2-hardware-receive-timestamp-counter.patch
>
>
Yes - exactly :-)
> The problem for this approach in our usecase (one way delay measurement) is
> that the real time clock of the CPUs (of the RX and TX ports) is not
> synchronized, but the hw timestamp (implemented in the NIC/FPGA) is.
>
Is it necessary to have syncronized clocks on the different CPUs or is
it feasible to calculate a per-cpu-clock offset in your driver, so that
you can build a complete timing overview of your setup?
Regards,
Oliver
--
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