Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1763335AbZAUKHy (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Jan 2009 05:07:54 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754709AbZAUKHm (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Jan 2009 05:07:42 -0500 Received: from mga14.intel.com ([143.182.124.37]:51965 "EHLO mga14.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752931AbZAUKHl (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Jan 2009 05:07:41 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.37,299,1231142400"; d="scan'208";a="102245773" Subject: Re: hardware time stamping with optional structs in data area From: Patrick Ohly To: David Miller Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-api@vger.kernel.org" References: <1229352899-31330-1-git-send-email-patrick.ohly@intel.com> <1232102164.18762.72.camel@pohly-MOBL> <20090116.110033.163815590.davem@davemloft.net> In-Reply-To: <20090116.110033.163815590.davem@davemloft.net> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 11:07:37 +0100 Message-Id: <1232532457.7829.19.camel@ecld0pohly> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2285 Lines: 49 On Fri, 2009-01-16 at 21:00 +0200, David Miller wrote: > From: Patrick Ohly > Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 11:36:04 +0100 > > > David, do you think it is ready to get included? > > Resubmit the patch set before asking such questions. Okay. I didn't want to spam the lists with just rebased patches if there were more fundamental objections against the current approach. I hope that this is no longer the case, so I'll post the current, rebased patch set as follow-up to this mail (because the description in the orginal mail of this thread still applies). I personally consider the core infrastructure patches ready. If there are further comments I'd be happy to work on those, of course. The igb driver patches are more experimental, please don't include them. I rebased the patches against net-next-2.6 as of today. I tested them with the modified PTPd with and without hardware support on x86. With 64 bit kernel and user space both works. With 32 bit user space on a 64 bit kernel software-only time stamping works (thanks to the socket's compatibility layer), hardware support doesn't: the ifreq is passed to the right device driver, but the data pointer from a 32 bit process is not interpreted correctly by a 64 bit driver. If there is a way to handle this then please let me know - I didn't see how a device driver could distinguish between a 32 and 64 bit user process. With a 32 bit kernel software time stamping works. I couldn't test hardware support because I couldn't get the igb driver to work. Even without any of the patches it failed to transmit packets (tested with net-next-2.6 sources and original Ubuntu 8.10 installation). I need to look into this problem further, but don't want to hold up the review of the patches. -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/