[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACAyw9-rKNX=EtQ2JtLkLTyDfj2-HBtZfFB05TLgcJSw3ja7AQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2021 09:34:31 +0100
From: Lorenz Bauer <lmb@...udflare.com>
To: Maxim Mikityanskiy <maximmi@...dia.com>
Cc: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@...gle.com>,
Florent Revest <revest@...omium.org>,
Joe Stringer <joe@...ium.io>, Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>,
Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 09/10] bpf: Add a helper to issue timestamp
cookies in XDP
On Fri, 22 Oct 2021 at 17:56, Maxim Mikityanskiy <maximmi@...dia.com> wrote:
>
> tcp_time_stamp_raw() uses ktime_get_ns(), while bpf_ktime_get_ns() uses
> ktime_get_mono_fast_ns(). Is it fine to use ktime_get_mono_fast_ns()
> instead of ktime_get_ns()? I'm a bit worried about this note in
> Documentation/core-api/timekeeping.rst:
>
> > most drivers should never call them,
> > since the time is allowed to jump under certain conditions.
That depends on what happens when the timestamp is "off". Since you're
sending this value over the network I doubt that the two methods will
show a difference.
Lorenz
--
Lorenz Bauer | Systems Engineer
6th Floor, County Hall/The Riverside Building, SE1 7PB, UK
www.cloudflare.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists