linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH bpf-next v5 1/2] net: Rename mono_delivery_time to tstamp

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2024 16:55:23 -0700
From: "Abhishek Chauhan (ABC)" <quic_abchauha@...cinc.com>
To: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>
CC: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller"
	<davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski
	<kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Andrew Halaney <ahalaney@...hat.com>,
        "Martin
 KaFai Lau" <martin.lau@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        <kernel@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH bpf-next v5 1/2] net: Rename mono_delivery_time to
 tstamp_type for scalabilty



On 4/25/2024 4:50 PM, Martin KaFai Lau wrote:
> On 4/25/24 12:02 PM, Abhishek Chauhan (ABC) wrote:
>>>>> @@ -9444,7 +9444,7 @@ static struct bpf_insn *bpf_convert_tstamp_read(const struct bpf_prog *prog,
>>>>                       TC_AT_INGRESS_MASK | SKB_MONO_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK);
>>>>           *insn++ = BPF_JMP32_IMM(BPF_JNE, tmp_reg,
>>>>                       TC_AT_INGRESS_MASK | SKB_MONO_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK, 2);
>>>> -        /* skb->tc_at_ingress && skb->mono_delivery_time,
>>>> +        /* skb->tc_at_ingress && skb->tstamp_type:1,
>>> Is the :1 a stale comment after we discussed how to handle the 2-bit
>> This is first patch which does not add tstamp_type:2 at the moment.
>> This series is divided into two patches
>> 1. One patchset => Just rename (So the comment is still skb->tstamp_type:1)
>> 2. Second patchset => add another bit (comment is changed to skb->tstamp_type:2)
> 
> I would suggest to completely avoid the ":1" or ":2" part in patch 1. Just use "... && skb->tstamp_type". The number of bits does not matter. The tstamp_type will still be considered as a whole even if it would become 3 bits (unlikely) in the future.

Okay i will just keep it as skb->tstamp_type instead of adding bitfields.