[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <878rv9nybx.fsf@kurt>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2022 12:05:22 +0100
From: Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@...utronix.de>
To: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
Cc: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Joakim Zhang <qiangqing.zhang@....com>,
Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@...hat.com>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V1 net-next 3/4] net: Let the active time stamping
layer be selectable.
On Thu Jan 20 2022, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> On Mon, Jan 03, 2022 at 03:25:54PM -0800, Richard Cochran wrote:
>> Make the sysfs knob writable, and add checks in the ioctl and time
>> stamping paths to respect the currently selected time stamping layer.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
>> ---
>
> Could we think of a more flexible solution? Your proposal would not
> allow a packet to have multiple hwtstamps, and maybe that would be
> interesting for some use cases (hardware testing, mostly).
One use case i can think of for having multiple hwtimestamps per packet
is crosstimestamping. Some devices such as hellcreek have multiple PHCs
and allow generation of such crosstimestamps.
Thanks,
Kurt
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (862 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists