netdev - Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/1] net: support for hardware timestamping

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: <200807292027.01727.netdev@axxeo.de>
Date:	Tue, 29 Jul 2008 20:27:01 +0200
From:	Ingo Oeser <netdev@...eo.de>
To:	Octavian Purdila <opurdila@...acom.com>
Cc:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>,
	Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly@...el.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/1] net: support for hardware timestamping

Hi Octavian,

Octavian Purdila schrieb:
> On Tuesday 29 July 2008, Ingo Oeser wrote:
> In here:
> 
> net/netfilter/xt_time.c
> 
> it seems that the skb->tstamp needs to be CPU time. 

Yeah, but not being off more than half a second should be ok
even for that obscure use case. 

If your objective is to measure time and relate it to wall clock time, 
your host clock should be close to that using NTP without any problems :-)

> Frankly I don't care about that, but the tstamp is also used in other places 
> like the IP and TCP code paths and I can't say that I barely understand that 
> part :) 
> 
> But if it is ok to use any kind of monotonic increasing timestamp, that will 
> solve my problem, indeed.

Great! :-)


Best Regards

Ingo Oeser
--
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