netdev - Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH next-queue v2 3/3] igc: Add support for PTP getcrosststamp()

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: <20201118075534.2a5e63c4@kicinski-fedora-PC1C0HJN.hsd1.ca.comcast.net>
Date:   Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:55:34 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com>
Cc:     Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
        Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@...hat.com>,
        intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org, andre.guedes@...el.com,
        linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        bhelgaas@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH next-queue v2 3/3] igc: Add support
 for PTP getcrosststamp()

On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 17:21:48 -0800 Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote:
> > Also, what is the point of providing time measurements every 1
> > millisecond?  
> 
> I sincerely have no idea. I had no power on how the hardware was
> designed, and how PTM was implemented in HW.

Is the PTMed latency not dependent on how busy the bus is?
That'd make 1ms more reasonable.