From: Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com>
To: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
Cc: Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 net-next 5/7] net: fix documentation of struct scm_timestamping
Date: Fri, 19 May 2017 12:11:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170519101118.GD21003@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAF=yD-JGUw6pryNV3YevFMxC5=1A62qujAfFO7LjQi2LtsSg4g@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 03:38:30PM -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com> wrote:
> > +Note that if the SO_TIMESTAMP or SO_TIMESTAMPNS option is enabled
> > +together with SO_TIMESTAMPING using SOF_TIMESTAMPING_SOFTWARE, a false
> > +software timestamp will be generated in the recvmsg() call and passed
> > +in ts[0] when a real software timestamp is missing.
>
> With receive software timestamping this is expected behavior? I would make
> explicit that this happens even on tx timestamps.
How about adding ", e.g. when receive timestamping is enabled
between receiving the message and the recvmsg() call, or it is a
message with a hardware transmit timestamp." ?
> > For this reason it
> > +is not recommended to combine SO_TIMESTAMP(NS) with SO_TIMESTAMPING.
>
> And I'd remove this. The extra timestamp is harmless, and we may be missing
> other reasons why someone would want to enable both on the same socket.
Ok. I'm just concerned people will inadvertently use the timestamp as
a real timestamp and then wonder why SW TX timestamping is so bad. I
have fallen into this trap.
--
Miroslav Lichvar
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-19 10:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-05-18 14:07 [PATCH v5 net-next 0/7] Extend socket timestamping API Miroslav Lichvar
2017-05-18 14:07 ` [PATCH v5 net-next 1/7] net: define receive timestamp filter for NTP Miroslav Lichvar
2017-05-18 14:07 ` [PATCH v5 net-next 2/7] net: ethernet: update drivers to handle HWTSTAMP_FILTER_NTP_ALL Miroslav Lichvar
2017-05-18 14:07 ` [PATCH v5 net-next 3/7] net: add function to retrieve original skb device using NAPI ID Miroslav Lichvar
2017-05-18 14:07 ` [PATCH v5 net-next 4/7] net: add new control message for incoming HW-timestamped packets Miroslav Lichvar
2017-05-18 20:20 ` Willem de Bruijn
2017-05-19 10:04 ` Miroslav Lichvar
2017-05-18 14:07 ` [PATCH v5 net-next 5/7] net: fix documentation of struct scm_timestamping Miroslav Lichvar
2017-05-18 19:38 ` Willem de Bruijn
2017-05-19 10:11 ` Miroslav Lichvar [this message]
2017-05-19 15:23 ` Willem de Bruijn
2017-05-18 14:07 ` [PATCH v5 net-next 6/7] net: allow simultaneous SW and HW transmit timestamping Miroslav Lichvar
2017-05-18 14:07 ` [PATCH v5 net-next 7/7] net: ethernet: update drivers to make both SW and HW TX timestamps Miroslav Lichvar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170519101118.GD21003@localhost \
--to=mlichvar@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=richardcochran@gmail.com \
--cc=willemb@google.com \
--cc=willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.