Re: [PATCH bpf-next v11 09/12] bpf: add BPF_SOCK_OPS_TS_ACK_OPT_CB callback

[Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>]

On 2/14/25 3:16 PM, Jason Xing wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 15, 2025 at 4:34 AM Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev> wrote:
>>
>> On 2/13/25 5:00 PM, Jason Xing wrote:
>>> diff --git a/net/dsa/user.c b/net/dsa/user.c
>>> index 291ab1b4acc4..794fe553dd77 100644
>>> --- a/net/dsa/user.c
>>> +++ b/net/dsa/user.c
>>> @@ -897,7 +897,7 @@ static void dsa_skb_tx_timestamp(struct dsa_user_priv *p,
>>>    {
>>>        struct dsa_switch *ds = p->dp->ds;
>>>
>>> -     if (!(skb_shinfo(skb)->tx_flags & SKBTX_HW_TSTAMP))
>>> +     if (!(skb_shinfo(skb)->tx_flags & SKBTX_HW_TSTAMP_NOBPF))
>>
>> This change should be in patch 8.
>>
>> [ ... ]
>>
>>> diff --git a/net/socket.c b/net/socket.c
>>> index 262a28b59c7f..517de433d4bb 100644
>>> --- a/net/socket.c
>>> +++ b/net/socket.c
>>> @@ -676,7 +676,7 @@ void __sock_tx_timestamp(__u32 tsflags, __u8 *tx_flags)
>>>        u8 flags = *tx_flags;
>>>
>>>        if (tsflags & SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_HARDWARE) {
>>> -             flags |= SKBTX_HW_TSTAMP;
>>> +             flags |= SKBTX_HW_TSTAMP_NOBPF;
>>
>> Same here.
> 
> Sure, you're right. If you feel it's necessary to re-spin, I will
> adjust these two points :)

That will be good. I would wait a bit to collect Willem's comment first.