From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jiri Pirko Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] [RFC] packet: experimental support for 64-bit timestamps Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 17:59:45 +0100 Message-ID: <20171127165945.GC1971@nanopsycho.orion> References: <20171127162001.4055813-1-arnd@arndb.de> <20171127162001.4055813-2-arnd@arndb.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "David S. Miller" , y2038@lists.linaro.org, Shuah Khan , Willem de Bruijn , Mike Maloney , Eric Dumazet , Kees Cook , "Rosen, Rami" , Andrey Konovalov , "Reshetova, Elena" , Sowmini Varadhan , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org To: Arnd Bergmann Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20171127162001.4055813-2-arnd@arndb.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 05:19:25PM CET, arnd@arndb.de wrote: >I tried to figure out what it would take to do a version 4 mmap packet >socket interface to completely avoid the y2106 overflow problem. This is >what I came up with, reusing most of the v3 code, except for the parts >where we access the timestamps. > >For kselftest, I'm adding support for testing v4 in addition to v1-v3, >but the test currently does not look at the timestamps, so it won't >check that the timestamp format actually works as intended, only that >I didn't break the parts that worked in the v3 selftest. > >Overall, this is more of a mess than I expected, so it's probably not >worth doing a v4 format just for the timestamp, but the patch can serve >as a reference for anyone that needs a new format for other reasons and >fixes this along with the other changes. > >Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann >--- [...] >@@ -250,7 +269,8 @@ struct tpacket_block_desc { > enum tpacket_versions { > TPACKET_V1, > TPACKET_V2, >- TPACKET_V3 >+ TPACKET_V3, >+ TPACKET_V4, I wonder with how many versions are we going to eventually end up with :O