All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>
To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org
Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH RFC V1 net-next 0/6] Time based packet transmission
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 22:11:53 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170920201153.d3o3h62y2snuacef@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170920173533.32537-1-levipearson@gmail.com>

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:35:33AM -0600, levipearson at gmail.com wrote:
> Anyway, I am wholly in favor of this proposal--in fact, it is very similar to
> a patch set I shared with Eric Mann and others at Intel in early Dec 2016 with
> the intention to get some early feedback before submitting here. I never heard
> back and got busy with other things. I only mention this since you said
> elsewhere that you got this idea from Eric Mann yourself, and I am curious
> whether Eric and I came up with it independently (which I would not be
> surprised at).

Well, I actually thought of placing the Tx time in a CMSG all by
myself, but later I found Eric's talk from 2012,

  https://linuxplumbers.ubicast.tv/videos/linux-network-enabling-requirements-for-audiovideo-bridging-avb/

and so I wanted to give him credit.

Thanks,
Richard


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>
To: levipearson@gmail.com
Cc: rcochran@linutronix.de, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org,
	vinicius.gomes@intel.com, andre.guedes@intel.com,
	john.stultz@linaro.org, jesus.sanchez-palencia@intel.com,
	henrik@austad.us, tglx@linutronix.de, anna-maria@linutronix.de,
	davem@davemloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V1 net-next 0/6] Time based packet transmission
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 22:11:53 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170920201153.d3o3h62y2snuacef@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170920173533.32537-1-levipearson@gmail.com>

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:35:33AM -0600, levipearson@gmail.com wrote:
> Anyway, I am wholly in favor of this proposal--in fact, it is very similar to
> a patch set I shared with Eric Mann and others at Intel in early Dec 2016 with
> the intention to get some early feedback before submitting here. I never heard
> back and got busy with other things. I only mention this since you said
> elsewhere that you got this idea from Eric Mann yourself, and I am curious
> whether Eric and I came up with it independently (which I would not be
> surprised at).

Well, I actually thought of placing the Tx time in a CMSG all by
myself, but later I found Eric's talk from 2012,

  https://linuxplumbers.ubicast.tv/videos/linux-network-enabling-requirements-for-audiovideo-bridging-avb/

and so I wanted to give him credit.

Thanks,
Richard

  reply	other threads:[~2017-09-20 20:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-09-18  7:41 [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH RFC V1 net-next 0/6] Time based packet transmission Richard Cochran
2017-09-18  7:41 ` Richard Cochran
2017-09-18  7:41 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH RFC V1 net-next 1/6] net: Add a new socket option for a future transmit time Richard Cochran
2017-09-18  7:41   ` Richard Cochran
2017-09-18 14:50   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Richard Cochran
2017-09-18 14:50     ` Richard Cochran
2017-09-18 15:18   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Eric Dumazet
2017-09-18 15:18     ` Eric Dumazet
2017-09-18  7:41 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH RFC V1 net-next 2/6] net: skbuff: Add a field to support time based transmission Richard Cochran
2017-09-18  7:41   ` Richard Cochran
2017-09-18 15:14   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Eric Dumazet
2017-09-18 15:14     ` Eric Dumazet
2017-09-18  7:41 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH RFC V1 net-next 3/6] net: ipv4: raw: Hook into " Richard Cochran
2017-09-18  7:41   ` Richard Cochran
2017-09-18  7:41 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH RFC V1 net-next 4/6] net: ipv4: udp: " Richard Cochran
2017-09-18  7:41   ` Richard Cochran
2017-09-18  7:41 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH RFC V1 net-next 5/6] net: packet: " Richard Cochran
2017-09-18  7:41   ` Richard Cochran
2017-09-18  7:41 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH RFC V1 net-next 6/6] net: igb: Implement " Richard Cochran
2017-09-18  7:41   ` Richard Cochran
2017-09-18 16:34 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH RFC V1 net-next 0/6] Time based packet transmission David Miller
2017-09-18 16:34   ` David Miller
2017-12-05 21:22   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Vinicius Costa Gomes
2017-12-05 21:22     ` Vinicius Costa Gomes
2017-09-19 14:43 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Miroslav Lichvar
2017-09-19 14:43   ` Miroslav Lichvar
2017-09-19 16:46   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Richard Cochran
2017-09-19 16:46     ` Richard Cochran
2017-09-20 17:35 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " levipearson
2017-09-20 17:35   ` levipearson
2017-09-20 20:11   ` Richard Cochran [this message]
2017-09-20 20:11     ` Richard Cochran
2017-10-18 22:18 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
2017-10-18 22:18   ` Jesus Sanchez-Palencia
2017-10-19 20:44   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Richard Cochran
2017-10-19 20:44     ` Richard Cochran

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=20170920201153.d3o3h62y2snuacef@localhost \
    --to=richardcochran@gmail.com \
    --cc=intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org \
    /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.