PATCH: veth: Zero timestamp in xmit path.

PATCH: veth: Zero timestamp in xmit path.

[Ben Greear]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 863 bytes --]

This patch zero's the timestamp before handing the packet to
the peer interface.  This lets the peer recalculate the rx timestamp
if it cares about timestamps.

The patch is against net-next, compile tested there.  Similar patch was
functionally tested against 2.6.31-rc3.


Signed-Off-By:  Ben Greear<greearb@candelatech.com>

diff --git a/drivers/net/veth.c b/drivers/net/veth.c
index f1d753d..190f784 100644
--- a/drivers/net/veth.c
+++ b/drivers/net/veth.c
@@ -171,6 +171,7 @@ static int veth_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev)
  	if (skb->len > (rcv->mtu + MTU_PAD))
  		goto rx_drop;

+        skb->tstamp.tv64 = 0;
  	skb->pkt_type = PACKET_HOST;
  	skb->protocol = eth_type_trans(skb, rcv);
  	if (dev->features & NETIF_F_NO_CSUM)

Thanks,
Ben

-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com


[-- Attachment #2: veth_ts.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 422 bytes --]

diff --git a/drivers/net/veth.c b/drivers/net/veth.c
index f1d753d..190f784 100644
--- a/drivers/net/veth.c
+++ b/drivers/net/veth.c
@@ -171,6 +171,7 @@ static int veth_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev)
 	if (skb->len > (rcv->mtu + MTU_PAD))
 		goto rx_drop;
 
+        skb->tstamp.tv64 = 0;
 	skb->pkt_type = PACKET_HOST;
 	skb->protocol = eth_type_trans(skb, rcv);
 	if (dev->features & NETIF_F_NO_CSUM)

Re: PATCH: veth: Zero timestamp in xmit path.

[David Miller]

From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 12:46:55 -0700

> This patch zero's the timestamp before handing the packet to
> the peer interface.  This lets the peer recalculate the rx timestamp
> if it cares about timestamps.
> 
> The patch is against net-next, compile tested there.  Similar patch
> was
> functionally tested against 2.6.31-rc3.
> 
> 
> Signed-Off-By:  Ben Greear<greearb@candelatech.com>

Oh, where to begin... sigh...

The "off" and "by" in "Signed-off-by" is not capitalized.

There should not be two spaces after the Signed-off-by colon, there
should be only one.

There should be a space between your name and your <> enclosed email
address.

> @@ -171,6 +171,7 @@ static int veth_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct
> net_device *dev)

Your email client corrupted the patch by splitting up this line.

This is all just being sloppy, and it shows a lack of care put
into your submission.

Nevertheless I'm a sucker and I fixed this all up and applied your
patch.

Re: PATCH: veth: Zero timestamp in xmit path.

[Ben Greear]

On 07/21/2009 12:51 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Ben Greear<greearb@candelatech.com>
> Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 12:46:55 -0700
>
>> This patch zero's the timestamp before handing the packet to
>> the peer interface.  This lets the peer recalculate the rx timestamp
>> if it cares about timestamps.
>>
>> The patch is against net-next, compile tested there.  Similar patch
>> was
>> functionally tested against 2.6.31-rc3.
>>
>>
>> Signed-Off-By:  Ben Greear<greearb@candelatech.com>
>
> Oh, where to begin... sigh...
>
> The "off" and "by" in "Signed-off-by" is not capitalized.
>
> There should not be two spaces after the Signed-off-by colon, there
> should be only one.
>
> There should be a space between your name and your<>  enclosed email
> address.

I had no idea that was so important.

>
>> @@ -171,6 +171,7 @@ static int veth_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct
>> net_device *dev)
>
> Your email client corrupted the patch by splitting up this line.
>
> This is all just being sloppy, and it shows a lack of care put
> into your submission.

I sent as attachment as well to help mitigate this.  If sending only
an attachment is better, I will do so next time.

> Nevertheless I'm a sucker and I fixed this all up and applied your
> patch.

As always, your forbearance is appreciated!

Thanks,
Ben

-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com

Re: PATCH: veth: Zero timestamp in xmit path.

[David Miller]

From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 13:02:02 -0700

> On 07/21/2009 12:51 PM, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Ben Greear<greearb@candelatech.com>
>> Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 12:46:55 -0700
>>
>>> Signed-Off-By:  Ben Greear<greearb@candelatech.com>
>>
>> Oh, where to begin... sigh...
>>
>> The "off" and "by" in "Signed-off-by" is not capitalized.
>>
>> There should not be two spaces after the Signed-off-by colon, there
>> should be only one.
>>
>> There should be a space between your name and your<>  enclosed email
>> address.
> 
> I had no idea that was so important.

If you aren't even going to check over such easy and trivial visual
matters such as this, one can only imagine how much care has been put
into the change itself.

It shows how much you care about how your work and submissions look to
other people.

It's as much an issue of what it shows about the submitter's overall
mentality as it is an issue of "does it matter" or how important it is
to get the signoff syntax correct.