From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89073C76188 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 2023 09:04:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S237156AbjDEJE3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Apr 2023 05:04:29 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:35718 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230059AbjDEJE2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Apr 2023 05:04:28 -0400 Received: from mail-pj1-x1036.google.com (mail-pj1-x1036.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1036]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ACE5710FA for ; Wed, 5 Apr 2023 02:04:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x1036.google.com with SMTP id x15so33276622pjk.2 for ; Wed, 05 Apr 2023 02:04:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1680685466; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=3sbJKHi4/HtAWF7EeQvYFXKzs1WDvhLVQ2EBieg4Pv4=; b=NM1bolpkdX9FGIvjMpYznc46zYL8tfZiSoiffUTRAj9j2/3LjWVR6KEKAmOvzMzvz/ 37Pp7vd3cqHC+YKbqveA4LhHHVapAH8sIvn2ezn1xqh9cgsno55aWkZrm/j1y8zZR6AB 382GoPYiIao26CqvWNLNsMK7sUk5lL7Na25/2ALuiLNekubePscl5G2NsI1FYi8DYveE alK7js4gYehz7trCouD5vd/4hoS39cHG9o6ZhhaG+dCsWTr8dxa1bQ0pkG+/jR9Lf2Ka mQlrPofLrPdp1+E/PbAiIdJZ55LV85vQo+NPtPtNBTUNEq+YGD64q0njB6VltCKlIFR0 rq3g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1680685466; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=3sbJKHi4/HtAWF7EeQvYFXKzs1WDvhLVQ2EBieg4Pv4=; b=SDJ7T5o183qR/LCs9dWUMMJUJRsNVGpyoV2lX/tgRsBUXCf2BXu4vaoeS/E0/uLUuM rHyRTwLA4+RZiEYeuStt639SSnq8zZLWH0fDWwH3vZcKVtKwbKEd4ktYNzYSukLOTeSJ 3HNv5W8ZJNwyqRk+gN4WXgOrnX3OOMrhd30U1hXYzpPiNHKokgOkkNzKv3sZ06jpbhqj fHFmXcyG6selfGNoaTcwVzotNcWUrSl6QtRyxWTx0VFeI8XXUG1X5FxtaQ0Yq+b4wEhq ScsgWkHoMNyiUX9xI1XY9VSvL1jFepIyPnIX4yIIjkTjb4g7axJRE/XHRoRLeD648y/B S5Cw== X-Gm-Message-State: AAQBX9ec0xWDPjoQVZpDw5XLr2NMe5ZMSyx/mvUmrzUHEjwhA8YOoGGf 9S72QN9TSTfDcVVaPjYwwHU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AKy350algCAKXWDsGUTFoumqwU7rlFN84gb6qaBCBlaYWsr+ui080IMX+euH9vujjNR/PgSG+1oBNg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:590e:b0:23f:2757:ce99 with SMTP id k14-20020a17090a590e00b0023f2757ce99mr5665109pji.49.1680685466051; Wed, 05 Apr 2023 02:04:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Laptop-X1 ([2409:8a02:782e:a1c0:2082:5d32:9dce:4c17]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z9-20020a17090a468900b0023d1976cd34sm926356pjf.17.2023.04.05.02.04.22 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 05 Apr 2023 02:04:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2023 17:04:20 +0800 From: Hangbin Liu To: Miroslav Lichvar Cc: Jay Vosburgh , netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S . Miller" , Jakub Kicinski , Jonathan Toppins , Paolo Abeni , Eric Dumazet , Richard Cochran Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] bonding: add software timestamping support Message-ID: References: <20230329031337.3444547-1-liuhangbin@gmail.com> <7144.1680149564@famine> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 12:18:03PM +0200, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > > Oh.. I thought it's a software timestamp and all driver's should support it. > > I didn't expect that Infiniband doesn't support it. Based on this, it seems > > we can't even assume that all Ethernet drivers will support it, since a > > private driver may also not call skb_tx_timestamp() during transmit. Even if > > we check the slaves during ioctl call, we can't expect a later-joined slave > > to have SW TX timestamp support. It seems that we'll have to drop this feature." > > I'd not see that as a problem. At the time of the ioctl call the > information is valid. I think knowing that some timestamps will be > missing due to an interface not supporting the feature is a different > case than the admin later adding a new interface to the bond and > breaking the condition. The application likely already have some > expectations after it starts and configures timestamping, e.g. that > the RX filter is not changed or TX timestamping disabled. Thanks, this makes sense to me. I will try this way and post the new patch. Hangbin