[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <66563b459e5de_2a7f7e2949d@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2024 16:15:01 -0400
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>,
"Abhishek Chauhan (ABC)" <quic_abchauha@...cinc.com>
Cc: kernel@...cinc.com,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.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>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v8 1/3] net: Rename mono_delivery_time to
tstamp_type for scalabilty
Martin KaFai Lau wrote:
> On 5/28/24 10:24 AM, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > Abhishek Chauhan (ABC) wrote:
> >
> >>> +static inline void skb_set_delivery_type_by_clockid(struct sk_buff *skb,
> >>> + ktime_t kt, clockid_t clockid)
> >>> +{
> >>> + u8 tstamp_type = SKB_CLOCK_REALTIME;
> >>> +
> >>> + switch (clockid) {
> >>> + case CLOCK_REALTIME:
> >>> + break;
> >>> + case CLOCK_MONOTONIC:
> >>> + tstamp_type = SKB_CLOCK_MONOTONIC;
> >>> + break;
> >>> + default:
> >>
> >> Willem and Martin, I was thinking we should remove this warn_on_once from below line. Some systems also use panic on warn.
> >> So i think this might result in unnecessary crashes.
> >>
> >> Let me know what you think.
> >>
> >> Logs which are complaining.
> >> https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=118c3ae8980000
> >
> > I received reports too. Agreed that we need to fix these reports.
> >
> > The alternative is to limit sk_clockid to supported ones, by failing
> > setsockopt SO_TXTIME on an unsupported clock.
> >
> > That changes established ABI behavior. But I don't see how another
> > clock can be used in any realistic way anyway.
> >
> > Putting it out there as an option. It's riskier, but in the end I
> > believe a better fix than just allowing this state to continue.
>
> Failing early would be my preference also. The current ABI is arguably at least
> confusing (if not broken) considering other clockid is silently ignored by the
> kernel.
>
> >
> > A third option would be to not fail the system call, but silently
> > fall back to CLOCK_REALTIME. Essentially what happens in the datapath
> > in skb_set_delivery_type_by_clockid now. That is surprising behavior,
> > we should not do that.
>
> Not sure if it makes sense to go back to this option only after there is
> breakage report with a legit usage?
Agreed. We cannot break users. But I don't see how there are real
users for the current permissive API.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists