Re: [PATCH net-next v4 07/11] net-timestamp: support hwtstamp print for bpf extension

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

On 12/13/24 4:02 PM, Jason Xing wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 14, 2024 at 7:15 AM Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev> wrote:
>>
>> On 12/13/24 7:13 AM, Jason Xing wrote:
>>>>> -static void __skb_tstamp_tx_bpf(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb, int tstype)
>>>>> +static void __skb_tstamp_tx_bpf(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb,
>>>>> +                             struct skb_shared_hwtstamps *hwtstamps,
>>>>> +                             int tstype)
>>>>>     {
>>>>> +     struct timespec64 tstamp;
>>>>> +     u32 args[2] = {0, 0};
>>>>>         int op;
>>>>>
>>>>>         if (!sk)
>>>>> @@ -5552,6 +5556,11 @@ static void __skb_tstamp_tx_bpf(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb, int tstype
>>>>>                 break;
>>>>>         case SCM_TSTAMP_SND:
>>>>>                 op = BPF_SOCK_OPS_TS_SW_OPT_CB;
>>>>> +             if (hwtstamps) {
>>>>> +                     tstamp = ktime_to_timespec64(hwtstamps->hwtstamp);
>>>> Avoid this conversion which is likely not useful to the bpf prog. Directly pass
>>>> hwtstamps->hwtstamp (in ns?) to the bpf prog. Put lower 32bits in args[0] and
>>>> higher 32bits in args[1].
>>> It makes sense.
>>
>> When replying the patch 2 thread, I noticed it may not even have to pass the
>> hwtstamps in args here.
>>
>> Can "*skb_hwtstamps(skb) = *hwtstamps;" be done before calling the bpf prog?
>> Then the bpf prog can directly get it from skb_shinfo(skb)->hwtstamps.
>> It is like reading other fields in skb_shinfo(skb), e.g. the
>> skb_shinfo(skb)->tskey discussed in patch 10. The bpf prog will have a more
>> consistent experience in reading different fields of the skb_shinfo(skb).
>> skb_shinfo(skb)->hwtstamps is a more intuitive place to obtain the hwtstamp than
>> the broken up args[0] and args[1]. On top of that, there is also an older
>> "skb_hwtstamp" field in "struct bpf_sock_ops".
> 
> Right, right, last night, fortunately, I also spotted it. Let the bpf
> prog parse the shared info from skb then. A new callback for hwtstamp
> is needed, I suppose.

Why a new callback is needed? "*skb_hwtstamps(skb) = *hwtstamps;" cannot be done 
in __skb_tstamp_tx_bpf?