netdev - RE: [PATCH net-next RFC V1 1/5] net: Introduce peer to peer one step PTP time stamping.

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: <02874ECE860811409154E81DA85FBB5882D02105@ORSMSX115.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 21 Mar 2018 20:05:36 +0000
From:   "Keller, Jacob E" <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
To:     Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@...hat.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next RFC V1 1/5] net: Introduce peer to peer one
 step PTP time stamping.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org [mailto:netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org]
> On Behalf Of Richard Cochran
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2018 11:58 AM
> To: netdev@...r.kernel.org
> Cc: devicetree@...r.kernel.org; Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>; David Miller
> <davem@...emloft.net>; Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>; Mark Rutland
> <mark.rutland@....com>; Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@...hat.com>; Rob
> Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>; Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
> Subject: [PATCH net-next RFC V1 1/5] net: Introduce peer to peer one step PTP
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Same as HWTSTAMP_TX_ONESTEP_SYNC, but also enables time
> +	 * stamp insertion directly into PDelay_Resp packets. In this
> +	 * case, neither transmitted Sync nor PDelay_Resp packets will
> +	 * receive a time stamp via the socket error queue.
> +	 */
> +	HWTSTAMP_TX_ONESTEP_P2P,
>  };
> 

I am guessing that we expect all devices which support onestep P2P messages, will always support onestep SYNC as well?

Thanks,
Jake