On Tue, Oct 27, 2015, at 14:19, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Tue, 2015-10-27 at 12:15 +0100, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote: > > > Also counter question: why is the netstamp code protected by a > > static_key otherwise if not for trying to suppress the code path as > > often as possible if not used? ;) > > Any idea of why timestamping is asked on AF_UNIX in the first place ?
I guess syslog code want's to have more accurate timetstamps on when the packet is send. > For messages sent/received on af_unix sockets, in which place timestamp > is taken ? in unix_sendmsg on the sending unix socket (we check peer unix socket for timestamp flag). > Is it at the time skb is cooked and stored in receive queue, or the time > it was dequeued ? No, at time it is send by sendmsg on the sending socket. > In any case, is your patch changing af_unix behavior ? It is not clear > from your changelog... No, af_unix logic does not pass this logic at all, so we don't need to care about netstamp code. netstamp_needed is private to dev.c. Bye, Hannes -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
