netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v5 08/15] net-timestamp: support sw SCM_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]

Message-ID: <CAL+tcoC+bXAPP94zLka5GcwbpWNQtFijxd0PcPnVrtS-F=h6vQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2025 07:56:34 +0800
From: Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@...il.com>
To: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>
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, horms@...nel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org, 
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 08/15] net-timestamp: support sw
 SCM_TSTAMP_SND for bpf extension

On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 6:48 AM Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev> wrote:
>
> On 1/12/25 3:37 AM, Jason Xing wrote:
> > Support SCM_TSTAMP_SND case. Then we will get the software
> > timestamp when the driver is about to send the skb. Later, I
> > will support the hardware timestamp.
>
> > diff --git a/net/core/skbuff.c b/net/core/skbuff.c
> > index 169c6d03d698..0fb31df4ed95 100644
> > --- a/net/core/skbuff.c
> > +++ b/net/core/skbuff.c
> > @@ -5578,6 +5578,9 @@ static void __skb_tstamp_tx_bpf(struct sk_buff *skb, struct sock *sk, int tstype
> >       case SCM_TSTAMP_SCHED:
> >               op = BPF_SOCK_OPS_TS_SCHED_OPT_CB;
> >               break;
> > +     case SCM_TSTAMP_SND:
> > +             op = BPF_SOCK_OPS_TS_SW_OPT_CB;
>
> For the hwtstamps case, is skb_hwtstamps(skb) set? From looking at a few
> drivers, it does not look like it. I don't see the hwtstamps support in patch 10
> either. What did I miss ?

Sorry, I missed adding a new flag, namely, BPF_SOCK_OPS_TS_HW_OPT_CB.
I can also skip adding that new one and rename
BPF_SOCK_OPS_TS_SW_OPT_CB accordingly for sw and hw cases if we
finally decide to use hwtstamps parameter to distinguish two different
cases.

Thanks,
Jason

>
> > +             break;
> >       default:
> >               return;
> >       }