netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/5] PF_PACKET timestamping updates

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: <20130423181322.GC2675@netboy>
Date:	Tue, 23 Apr 2013 20:13:23 +0200
From:	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
To:	Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>
Cc:	Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Paul Chavent <Paul.Chavent@...ra.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/5] PF_PACKET timestamping updates

On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 02:53:03PM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> 
> Well, for the {RX,TX}_RING there is really no other way except the really
> really ugly possibility to introduce yet another tpacket header with 3
> time-stamp fields (sw, sys, raw). I really do not like that. :-)

Yep. Your solution with the status bits is nicer than the normal
SO_TIMESTAMPING cmsg. I think there is currently no way for the kernel
to produce two or three time stamps at the same time, and so the whole
timestamp triple is rather pointless.
 
> At least here, if you have traffic from different devices, you either get
> what you want (e.g. hw ts), or you'll get a fallback sw ts. That is also
> the case in the current code without this patchset. At least this set would
> solve this issue of telling the user what ts source he sees.

Yes, very good.

Thanks,
Richard
--
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