From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Richard Cochran Subject: Re: net-timestamp: MSG_TSTAMP flags and bytestream support Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 09:32:15 +0200 Message-ID: <20140625073215.GB5566@localhost.localdomain> References: <1403624632-17327-1-git-send-email-willemb@google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, davem@davemloft.net To: Willem de Bruijn Return-path: Received: from mail-we0-f179.google.com ([74.125.82.179]:62689 "EHLO mail-we0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751755AbaFYHco (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jun 2014 03:32:44 -0400 Received: by mail-we0-f179.google.com with SMTP id w62so1472463wes.24 for ; Wed, 25 Jun 2014 00:32:40 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1403624632-17327-1-git-send-email-willemb@google.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 11:43:45AM -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote: > This patchset extends socket timestamping in a number of related ways. > Most notably: > > 2 MSG_TSTAMP: request a single tx timestamp by passing a flag on send > 6 MSG_TSTAMP_ENQ: request a tx timestamp before traffic shaping. > 5 MSG_TSTAMP_ACK: request a tx timestamp after acknowledgements (TCP) > 4 TCP support for all three flags Can you tell us a bit about the use case? It sounds like that this is for performance monitoring. > Each individual patch commit message gives more detail about the > specific feature. > > The other patches support the main feature: > 1 explicitly define the timestamp response API > 3 optionally avoid looping large packets onto the socket error queue. > 7 documentation and an example test. I think #2 and #3 could be improvements to the so_timestamping api. The others probably need their own, separate api. I can't imagine wanting to mix so_timestamping with these new tcp time stamps, but maybe you want to explain the expected scenario? Thanks, Richard