Re: [RFC PATCH 02/12] net: infrastructure for hardware time stamping
From: Patrick Ohly <hidden>
Date: 2008-12-16 07:57:21
Also in:
linux-api, lkml
On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 21:53 +0000, Herbert Xu wrote:
Patrick Ohly [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
@@ -305,6 +406,8 @@ struct sk_buff { ipvs_property:1, peeked:1, nf_trace:1; + /* not all of the bits in optional are used */ + __u8 optional; __be16 protocol;You do reliase that this is going to grow the sk_buff by at least 4 bytes and not 1?
Yes. I should have been more explicit about that when talking about "adding one byte". At least it's better than adding 8 bytes of additional data, as in the previous patch. I haven't checked it, but was told that sk_buff is already tightly packed. It didn't look like there was a better place to put the byte either. -- 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-api" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html