[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <516C1FB2.50900@onera.fr>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 17:41:38 +0200
From: Paul Chavent <Paul.Chavent@...ra.fr>
To: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>
CC: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
daniel.borkmann@....ee.ethz.ch, xemul@...allels.com,
ebiederm@...ssion.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net-packet: tx timestamping on tpacket ring
On 04/14/2013 12:52 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> Paul, since you've reported / requested this, your use case would be to
> fill
> the ring, trigger a sendto() and then loop through all the frames to
> check the
> tx timestamps for your custom protocol mockup, then fill the returned
> frames
> again, etc.?
I've run a test that create (and setup) a tx ring buffer with 8 frames,
then fill the frames payload, then call sendto.
I've checked the timestamp by two means :
- check the timestamp in the tx ring after the status became
TP_STATUS_AVAILABLE again,
- by issuing 8 recvmsg on the ERRQUEUE.
Both timestamp are coherents and increment themselves.
The tests has been done with a UML kernel, and with software timestamps.
From my point of view, it seems usable.
However, I've found one strange behavior. I must call recvmsg as many
times as i have submitted a frame, or not at all. If i only pop the
ERRQUEUE for one or two message for instance, the next call to sentdo
fails with "No message of desired type" (errno 42).
Paul.
--
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