[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9d5dce58-c019-48b3-8815-b9e0f9d4e8cb@linux.dev>
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2024 00:19:10 -0700
From: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>
To: Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@...il.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
pabeni@...hat.com, dsahern@...nel.org, willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com,
willemb@...gle.com, ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, andrii@...nel.org,
eddyz87@...il.com, song@...nel.org, yonghong.song@...ux.dev,
john.fastabend@...il.com, kpsingh@...nel.org, sdf@...ichev.me,
haoluo@...gle.com, jolsa@...nel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, Jason Xing <kernelxing@...cent.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 7/9] net-timestamp: open gate for bpf_setsockopt
On 10/8/24 2:51 AM, Jason Xing wrote:
> From: Jason Xing <kernelxing@...cent.com>
>
> Now we allow users to set tsflags through bpf_setsockopt. What I
> want to do is passing SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RX_SOFTWARE flag, so that
> we can generate rx timestamps the moment the skb traverses through
> driver.
>
> Here is an example:
>
> case BPF_SOCK_OPS_ACTIVE_ESTABLISHED_CB:
> case BPF_SOCK_OPS_PASSIVE_ESTABLISHED_CB:
> sock_opt = SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RX_SOFTWARE;
> bpf_setsockopt(skops, SOL_SOCKET, SO_TIMESTAMPING,
> &sock_opt, sizeof(sock_opt));
> break;
>
> In this way, we can use bpf program that help us generate and report
> rx timestamp.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jason Xing <kernelxing@...cent.com>
> ---
> net/core/filter.c | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c
> index bd0d08bf76bb..9ce99d320571 100644
> --- a/net/core/filter.c
> +++ b/net/core/filter.c
> @@ -5225,6 +5225,9 @@ static int sol_socket_sockopt(struct sock *sk, int optname,
> break;
> case SO_BINDTODEVICE:
> break;
> + case SO_TIMESTAMPING_NEW:
> + case SO_TIMESTAMPING_OLD:
I believe this change was proposed before. It will change the user expectation
on the sk_error_queue. It needs some bits/fields/knobs for bpf. I think this
point is similar to other's earlier comments in this thread.
I only have a chance to briefly look at it. I think it is useful. This
bpf/timestamp feature request has come up before.
A high level comment. The current timestamp should work for non tcp sock? The
bpf/timestamp solution should be able to also.
sockops is tcp centric. From looking at patch 9 that needs to initialize 4 args,
this interface feels old and not sure we want to extend to other sock types.
This needs some thoughts.
> + break;
> default:
> return -EINVAL;
> }
Powered by blists - more mailing lists