On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 01:26:42 -0700
Mitchell Blank Jr <mitch@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Are there any common cases where skb->stamp is looked at more than
Yes, the packet scheduler can cause this to happen.
>If so I might recommend changing the API to be more like:
> const struct timeval *skb_timestamp(struct skbuff *skb);
Please no, making this a SKB or networking specific interface
make it nearly valueless and we might as well just stay with the
stuff we have.
> > Platforms with inter-cpu TSC synchronization issues will have some
> > troubles doing the same trick too, because one must handle properly
> > the case where the fast timestamp is converted to a timeval on a different
> > cpu on which the fast timestamp was recorded.
> Yeah, you'd probably have something like
Doesn't work as-is. You'd have to not only store the timestamp and
the cpu it was stored on, but also cross-call to that cpu to compute
the correct timeval. That's really expensive and probably
do_gettimeofday() is going to be faster in the long run compared to
such a scheme.