Back in 2015, Van Jacobson suggested to use usec resolution in TCP TS values.
This has been implemented in our private kernels.

Goals were :

1) better observability of delays in networking stacks.
2) better disambiguation of events based on TSval/ecr values.
3) building block for congestion control modules needing usec resolution.

Back then we implemented a schem based on private SYN options
to negotiate the feature.

For upstream submission, we chose to use a route attribute,
because this feature is probably going to be used in private
networks [1] [2].

ip route add 10/8 ... features tcp_usec_ts

Note that RFC 7323 recommends a
  "timestamp clock frequency in the range 1 ms to 1 sec per tick.",
but also mentions
  "the maximum acceptable clock frequency is one tick every 59 ns."

[1] Unfortunately RFC 7323 5.5 (Outdated Timestamps) suggests
to invalidate TS.Recent values after a flow was idle for more
than 24 days. This is the part making usec_ts a problem
for peers following this recommendation for long living
idle flows.

[2] Attempts to standardize usec ts went nowhere:

https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/97/slides/slides-97-tcpm-tcp-options-for-low-latency-00.pdf
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wang-tcpm-low-latency-opt/Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>