[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAL+tcoC+VEs1UusEKKVhutw+e=uyEqoaBhRTUV1G4HakM3JVYQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2024 19:29:11 +0800
From: Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@...il.com>
To: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
pabeni@...hat.com, dsahern@...nel.org, shuah@...nel.org, willemb@...gle.com,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Jason Xing <kernelxing@...cent.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] net-timestamp: add strict check when setting
tx flags
On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 6:39 PM Willem de Bruijn
<willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Jason Xing wrote:
> > From: Jason Xing <kernelxing@...cent.com>
> >
> > Even though this case is unlikely to happen, we have to avoid such
> > a case occurring at an earlier point: the sk_rmem_alloc could get
> > increased because of inserting more and more skbs into the errqueue
> > when calling __skb_complete_tx_timestamp(). This bad case would stop
> > the socket transmitting soon.
>
> It is up to the application to read from the error queue frequently
> enough and/or increase SO_RCVBUF.
Sure thing. If we test it without setting SOF_TIMESTAMPING_SOFTWARE on
the loopback, it will soon stop. That's the reason why I tried to add
the restriction just in case.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Jason Xing <kernelxing@...cent.com>
> > ---
> > net/core/sock.c | 4 ++++
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/net/core/sock.c b/net/core/sock.c
> > index fe87f9bd8f16..4bddd6f62e4f 100644
> > --- a/net/core/sock.c
> > +++ b/net/core/sock.c
> > @@ -905,6 +905,10 @@ int sock_set_timestamping(struct sock *sk, int optname,
> > if (val & ~SOF_TIMESTAMPING_MASK)
> > return -EINVAL;
> >
> > + if (val & SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_RECORD_MASK &&
> > + !(val & SOF_TIMESTAMPING_SOFTWARE))
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
>
> This breaks hardware timestamping
Yes, and sorry about that. I'll fix this.
>
> > if (val & SOF_TIMESTAMPING_OPT_ID_TCP &&
> > !(val & SOF_TIMESTAMPING_OPT_ID))
> > return -EINVAL;
> > --
> > 2.37.3
> >
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists