[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2020 17:30:30 -0700
From: Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@...il.com>
To: Christian Eggers <ceggers@...i.de>
Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Linux Network Devel Mailing List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/2] socket: fix option SO_TIMESTAMPING_NEW
On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 3:32 AM Christian Eggers <ceggers@...i.de> wrote:
>
> The comparison of optname with SO_TIMESTAMPING_NEW is wrong way around,
> so SOCK_TSTAMP_NEW will first be set and than reset again. Additionally
> move it out of the test for SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RX_SOFTWARE as this seems
> unrelated.
The SOCK_TSTAMP_NEW is reset only in the case when
SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RX_SOFTWARE is not set.
Note that we only call sock_enable_timestamp() at that time.
Why would SOCK_TSTAMP_NEW be relevant otherwise?
-Deepa
Powered by blists - more mailing lists