On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Martin KaFai Lau <ka...@fb.com> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 10:35:52AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Martin KaFai Lau <ka...@fb.com> wrote: >> >> > A bit off topic, I feel like the SKBTX_ACK_TSTAMP and txstamp_ack are sort >> > of redundant but I have not look into the details yet, so not completely >> > sure. It wwould be a separate cleanup patch if it is the case. >> >> Please read 6b084928baac562ed61866f540a96120e9c9ddb7 changelog ;) >> >> A cache line miss avoidance is critical > I looked at the patch but I probably am missing something :( > Is checking txstamp_ack alone enough and SKBTX_ACK_TSTAMP is not needed > since they are always set together?
That's right, the check on "(shinfo->tx_flags & SKBTX_ACK_TSTAMP)" in tcp_ack_tstamp() is redundant and I had a patch prepared to remove it. But I thought it's better to wait for https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/611938/ to be merged first. Feel free to remove it in your patches, if you'd prefer that.
