Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 08:40:50 -0800 From: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@freebsd.org> To: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org> Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r312296 - in head: lib/libc/sys sys/kern sys/netinet sys/netinet6 sys/sys tools/regression/sockets/udp_pingpong tools/regression/sockets/unix_cmsg Message-ID: <CAH7qZftsYAoBj7gFpOMHgT9a12N1yshAGY%2BkAEkpbTks7LL29Q@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAH7qZftckckygNG3HRqikiaGds6FsOedUR7AWKGi-PJg96FQjA@mail.gmail.com> References: <201701161746.v0GHkcPX071529@repo.freebsd.org> <20170117065231.GW2611@FreeBSD.org> <CAH7qZftckckygNG3HRqikiaGds6FsOedUR7AWKGi-PJg96FQjA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
That being said, is there any other socket option value in there implemented as enum? I don't see anything obvious, so that I am curious if it would stick out as an odd one in there. What do you think? -Max On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 6:22 AM, Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@freebsd.org> wrote: > Of course it's possible. Do you guys want me to amend that patch? > > -Max > > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 10:52 PM, Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org> > wrote: > >> Hi! >> >> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 05:46:38PM +0000, Maxim Sobolev wrote: >> M> Author: sobomax >> M> Date: Mon Jan 16 17:46:38 2017 >> M> New Revision: 312296 >> M> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/312296 >> M> >> M> Log: >> M> Add a new socket option SO_TS_CLOCK to pick from several different >> clock >> M> sources to return timestamps when SO_TIMESTAMP is enabled. Two >> additional >> M> clock sources are: >> M> >> M> o nanosecond resolution realtime clock (equivalent of >> CLOCK_REALTIME); >> M> o nanosecond resolution monotonic clock (equivalent of >> CLOCK_MONOTONIC). >> M> >> M> In addition to this, this option provides unified interface to get >> bintime >> M> (equivalent of using SO_BINTIME), except it also supported with IPv6 >> where >> M> SO_BINTIME has never been supported. The long term plan is to >> depreciate >> M> SO_BINTIME and move everything to using SO_TS_CLOCK. >> M> >> M> Idea for this enhancement has been briefly discussed on the Net >> session >> M> during dev summit in Ottawa last June and the general input was >> positive. >> M> >> M> This change is believed to benefit network benchmarks/profiling as >> well >> M> as other scenarios where precise time of arrival measurement is >> necessary. >> M> >> M> There are two regression test cases as part of this commit: one >> extends unix >> M> domain test code (unix_cmsg) to test new SCM_XXX types and another >> one >> M> implementis totally new test case which exchanges UDP packets >> between two >> M> processes using both conventional methods (i.e. calling >> clock_gettime(2) >> M> before recv(2) and after send(2)), as well as using >> setsockopt()+recv() in >> M> receive path. The resulting delays are checked for sanity for all >> supported >> M> clock types. >> M> >> M> Reviewed by: adrian, gnn >> M> Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D9171 >> >> Is it possible to declare possible values as a enum and make so_ts_clock >> fields of that enum type? >> >> -- >> Totus tuus, Glebius. >> >> >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAH7qZftsYAoBj7gFpOMHgT9a12N1yshAGY%2BkAEkpbTks7LL29Q>