netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v8 05/12] net-timestamp: prepare for isolating two modes of SO

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+tcoDcJd9zNNnsxaCocA1W-eTj+=Ca=B-DoL5Qm6ENfSZ_Fw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2025 10:40:42 +0800
From: Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@...il.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com, 
	dsahern@...nel.org, willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com, willemb@...gle.com, 
	ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, andrii@...nel.org, martin.lau@...ux.dev, 
	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 bpf-next v8 05/12] net-timestamp: prepare for isolating
 two modes of SO_TIMESTAMPING

On Wed, Feb 5, 2025 at 9:47 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed,  5 Feb 2025 02:30:17 +0800 Jason Xing wrote:
> > @@ -4565,7 +4566,7 @@ static inline void skb_tx_timestamp(struct sk_buff *skb)
> >  {
> >       skb_clone_tx_timestamp(skb);
> >       if (skb_shinfo(skb)->tx_flags & SKBTX_SW_TSTAMP)
> > -             skb_tstamp_tx(skb, NULL);
> > +             __skb_tstamp_tx(skb, NULL, NULL, skb->sk, true, SCM_TSTAMP_SND);
> >  }
>
> Please move skb_tx_timestamp() to net/core/timestamping.c
> You can make skb_clone_tx_timestamp() static, this is its only caller.

I just tested it and it works after reading your message.

I wonder if we need a separate cleanup after this series about moving
this kind of functions into net/core/timestamping.c, say,
__skb_tstamp_tx()?

Thanks,
Jason

> This way on balance we won't be adding any non-inlined calls,
> and we don't have to drag the linux/errqueue.h include into skbuff.h