netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2] packet: tx timestamping on tpacket ring

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: <5174F29C.2030806@onera.fr>
Date:	Mon, 22 Apr 2013 10:19:40 +0200
From:	Paul Chavent <Paul.Chavent@...ra.fr>
To:	Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
CC:	Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] packet: tx timestamping on tpacket ring

On 04/21/2013 06:42 PM, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> Tx has the advantage that time sources can be chosen
> per socket independent of all other sockets

Sorry if my question is trivial.
I understand that when we require rx timestamping, we need to ask to the 
device to timestamp all incoming packets since we don't know the path of 
the packet in advance.
For tx timestamping, you seems to say that the request to timestamp the 
packet is contained in the skbuff and is done on a per packet basis ?

--
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