On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 17:50:39 -0700 Rahul Rameshbabu wrote: > > Should we give some guidance to drivers which "ignore" time stamping > > requests if they used up all the "slots"? Even if just temporary until > > they are fixed? Maybe we can add after all the fields something like: > > > > For drivers which ignore further timestamping requests when there are > > too many in flight, the ignored requests are currently not counted by > > any of the statistics. > > I was actually thinking it would be better to merge them into the error > counter temporarily. Reason being is that in the case Intel notices that > their slots are full, they just drop traffic from my understanding > today. If the error counters increment in that situation, it helps with > the debug to a degree. EBUSY is an error in general. That works, too, let's recommend it (FWIW no preference whether in the entry for @err or somewhere separately in the kdoc).
