From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: Network performance degradation from 2.6.11.12 to 2.6.16.20 Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 22:39:37 +0200 Message-ID: <200606192239.37533.ak@suse.de> References: <4492D5D3.4000303@atmos.washington.edu> <200606191724.31305.ak@suse.de> <4496E041.5070501@nortel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jesper Dangaard Brouer , Harry Edmon , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from ns1.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:15256 "EHLO mx1.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932221AbWFSUul (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Jun 2006 16:50:41 -0400 To: "Chris Friesen" In-Reply-To: <4496E041.5070501@nortel.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Monday 19 June 2006 19:34, Chris Friesen wrote: > Andi Kleen wrote: > > Incoming packets are only time stamped > > when someone asks for the timestamps. > > Doesn't that add scheduling latency to the timestamps? Or is is a flag > that gets set to trigger timestamping at packet arrival? It's a flag (or more precise a global counter) -Andi