Re: hardware time stamping with optional structs in data area

Patrick Ohly [off-list ref] wrote:

True - at this time. But what if this extension mechanism turns out to
be useful and we end up with more optional structures? I was hoping that
this might be the case and thus tried to make it easy to add more
structures.

You're putting the extension in the skb->end area, right?

How big are the time stamps? If they're not that big, why don't
we put it into the shinfo structure itself? For the common case,
we have plenty of space due to kmalloc padding anyway.

Cheers,
-- 
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} [off-list ref]
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt