Re: Fire Engine??

[Andi Kleen]

On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 15:13:52 -0800
"David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 23:56:41 +0100
> Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 14:36:20 -0800
> > "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > > 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.
> 
> We can't change behavior like this.  Every time we've tried to
> do it, we've been burnt.  Remember nonlocal-bind?

The behaviour is not really changed, just the precision of the timestamp
is temporarily (a few tens of ms on a busy network) worse. 

And the jitter in this timestamp is already higher than this when
you consider queueing delays and interrupt mitigation in the driver.

-Andi

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/