From owner-cvs-all Sat Dec 16 22:25:54 2000 From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 16 22:25:52 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from whizzo.transsys.com (whizzo.TransSys.COM [144.202.42.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B721737B400; Sat, 16 Dec 2000 22:25:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from whizzo.transsys.com (localhost.transsys.com [127.0.0.1]) by whizzo.transsys.com (8.11.1/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBH6Pp510577; Sun, 17 Dec 2000 01:25:51 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from louie@whizzo.transsys.com) Message-Id: <200012170625.eBH6Pp510577@whizzo.transsys.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.2 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Bill Fumerola Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG X-Image-URL: http://www.transsys.com/louie/images/louie-mail.jpg From: "Louis A. Mamakos" Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/netinet ip_icmp.c References: <200012162139.eBGLdnX07481@freefall.freebsd.org> In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 16 Dec 2000 13:39:49 PST." <200012162139.eBGLdnX07481@freefall.freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 01:25:51 -0500 Sender: louie@TransSys.COM Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > billf 2000/12/16 13:39:49 PST > > Modified files: > sys/netinet ip_icmp.c > Log: > Use getmicrotime() instead of microtime() when timestamping ICMP packets, > the former is quicker and accurate enough for use here. Accurate enough for who, and for what use? I'm just wondering that with the addition of being able to rate-limit ICMP Timestamp reply messages why we'd go to the trouble to degrade the quality of the timestamps returned? Sure, you can ask with NTP, but that results in having to (very likely) perform a context switch into a user process. louie To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message