netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v4 1/5] net-timestamp: extend SCM

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]

Message-Id: <20140731.133711.750711941438180832.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Thu, 31 Jul 2014 13:37:11 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	willemb@...gle.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
	richardcochran@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 1/5] net-timestamp: extend SCM_TIMESTAMPING
 ancillary data struct

From: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 11:48:44 -0400

> Applications that request kernel tx timestamps with SO_TIMESTAMPING
> read timestamps as recvmsg() ancillary data. The response is defined
> implicitly as timespec[3].
> 
> 1) define struct scm_timestamping explicitly and
> 
> 2) add support for new tstamp types. On tx, scm_timestamping always
>    accompanies a sock_extended_err. Define previously unused field
>    ee_info to signal the type of ts[0]. Introduce SCM_TSTAMP_SND.
> 
> The reception path is not modified. On rx, no struct similar to
> sock_extended_err is passed along with SCM_TIMESTAMPING.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
 ...
> +/* type of ts[0], passed in ee_info */
> +enum {
> +	SCM_TSTAMP_SND = 1,	/* driver passed skb to NIC */
> +};
 ...
> @@ -3521,6 +3521,7 @@ void skb_tstamp_tx(struct sk_buff *orig_skb,
>  	memset(serr, 0, sizeof(*serr));
>  	serr->ee.ee_errno = ENOMSG;
>  	serr->ee.ee_origin = SO_EE_ORIGIN_TIMESTAMPING;
> +	serr->ee.ee_info = hwtstamps ? 0 : SCM_TSTAMP_SND;
>  
>  	err = sock_queue_err_skb(sk, skb);
>  

Up until now we've placed the value zero in the ee_info field, do you have
a strong reason to not define SCM_TSTAMP_SND to zero as well?

Unless you have a compelling reason to do otherwise, we should use zero.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html