On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Olivier Matz <olivier.m...@6wind.com> wrote: >> > >> > Do you still want to call the 64bit field "timestamp" or rename it >> > to something neutral and document that it is used together with the >> > mbuf flags? > > I think timestamp is a good name. In the current RFC patchset, we have > this comment: > > /** Valid if PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP is set. The unit is nanoseconds */ > uint64_t timestamp; > > We could change it to something like: > > /** Valid if PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP is set. The unit and time > * reference are not normalized but are always the same > * for a given port. > */ > uint64_t timestamp; >
Looks good to me. Thanks, Jan
