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]
Date:   Fri, 24 Feb 2023 09:01:59 +0000
From:   Martin Habets <habetsm.xilinx@...il.com>
To:     Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
Cc:     Íñigo Huguet <ihuguet@...hat.com>,
        Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev>,
        ecree.xilinx@...il.com, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
        kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Yalin Li <yalli@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 3/4] sfc: support unicast PTP

On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 08:52:45AM -0800, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 03:41:51PM +0100, Íñigo Huguet wrote:
> 
> > The reason is explained in a comment in efx_ptp_insert_multicast filters:
> >    Must filter on both event and general ports to ensure
> >    that there is no packet re-ordering
> 
> There is nothing wrong with re-ordering.

I disagree. If re-ordering can be avoided that is a good thing.

> Nothing guarantees that
> datagrams are received in the order they are sent.

True, but they usually are.

> The user space PTP stack must be handle out of order messages correct
> (which ptp4l does do BTW).

This takes CPU time. If it can be avoided that is a good thing, as
it puts less pressure on the host. It is not just about CPU load, it
is also about latency.

Martin

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ