From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264359AbTKZW6s (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Nov 2003 17:58:48 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264360AbTKZW6s (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Nov 2003 17:58:48 -0500 Received: from ns.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:59349 "EHLO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264359AbTKZW6q (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Nov 2003 17:58:46 -0500 Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 23:56:41 +0100 From: Andi Kleen To: "David S. Miller" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Fire Engine?? Message-Id: <20031126235641.36fd71c1.ak@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20031126143620.5229fb1f.davem@redhat.com> References: <20031125183035.1c17185a.davem@redhat.com.suse.lists.linux.kernel> <20031126113040.3b774360.davem@redhat.com> <3FC505F4.2010006@google.com> <20031126120316.3ee1d251.davem@redhat.com> <20031126232909.7e8a028f.ak@suse.de> <20031126143620.5229fb1f.davem@redhat.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.7 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 14:36:20 -0800 "David S. Miller" wrote: > On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 23:29:09 +0100 > Andi Kleen wrote: > > > The first SIOCGTSTAMP would be inaccurate, but the following (after > > all untimestamped packets have been flushed) would be ok. > > I don't think this is acceptable. It's important that all > of the timestamps are as accurate as they were before. I disagree on that. The window is small and slowing down 99.99999% of all users who never care about this for this extremely obscure misdesigned API does not make much sense to me. Also if you worry about these you could add an optional sysctl to always take it, so if anybody really has an application that relies on the first time stamp being accurate and they cannot use SO_TIMESTAMP they could set the sysctl. -Andi