From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-185.mta0.migadu.com (out-185.mta0.migadu.com [91.218.175.185]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 560A914D6F9 for ; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 10:48:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.185 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1727693313; cv=none; b=B9XJV8Tb1EFpg50XEzwhUcCLMI4TbnsTGcEhue2ceO+iKThQV/xCHIpHxtZDIimmBdJHip4S4TUZJKm2CNEyIAu5aBNaH8QnbFShdyI4Uw/PtzUAMH/V16cPOrSghYpbPItlfYTcqGtZrRgPGPHZY71LQSOeEtgHMl3lY/6GgsM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1727693313; c=relaxed/simple; bh=pTTsDdJpawm7RUI6Os1ekom1s4CMeJGlLCrPhMweBec=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=NQodHhWBIzoKGJmUloJeW3HehkeePkWA6OnupfKqZBtAEcE7oizd1cyWLVWVJO3jzuGL6aBhZpFnSJ1u1BETlYYISuhu6at1B+OuO6m3paVdG9DZyOYWJjSGJJo2Hy7K6gRxZlG9EhAY2WLbnYav/7fGjjE7akf6hzccRjws/Ck= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=FUggaXbt; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.185 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="FUggaXbt" Message-ID: <79998b2c-0ca7-4180-9d7c-1d6af96dd4cf@linux.dev> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1727693308; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=uI3q9iZONyR3+TXhKk4RxBiCA8aB7WahldqlcK77CDU=; b=FUggaXbtP8c8W/TKD2wvj5E6ejxOCJmYa3rwmlcptblG8CCoQfLuhvU+ioQPg/HXq/fuDn CXQpnFmbgtUZU05WT0ROVuF2rA2xCfYvYI2TpcHuawuzYoOEw/Xqt+v7Ai2SxbMHs7X4VF H9E/VHY0I8gkdVYTqnPEQfnb22joc94= Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2024 11:48:22 +0100 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] net-timestamp: add strict check when setting tx flags To: Jason Xing , davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, dsahern@kernel.org, willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com, shuah@kernel.org, willemb@google.com Cc: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Jason Xing References: <20240930092416.80830-1-kerneljasonxing@gmail.com> <20240930092416.80830-2-kerneljasonxing@gmail.com> Content-Language: en-US X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Vadim Fedorenko In-Reply-To: <20240930092416.80830-2-kerneljasonxing@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT On 30/09/2024 10:24, Jason Xing wrote: > From: Jason Xing > > Even though this case is unlikely to happen, we have to avoid such > a case occurring at an earlier point: the sk_rmem_alloc could get > increased because of inserting more and more skbs into the errqueue > when calling __skb_complete_tx_timestamp(). This bad case would stop > the socket transmitting soon. > > Signed-off-by: Jason Xing > --- > net/core/sock.c | 4 ++++ > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/net/core/sock.c b/net/core/sock.c > index fe87f9bd8f16..4bddd6f62e4f 100644 > --- a/net/core/sock.c > +++ b/net/core/sock.c > @@ -905,6 +905,10 @@ int sock_set_timestamping(struct sock *sk, int optname, > if (val & ~SOF_TIMESTAMPING_MASK) > return -EINVAL; > > + if (val & SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_RECORD_MASK && > + !(val & SOF_TIMESTAMPING_SOFTWARE)) > + return -EINVAL; SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_RECORD_MASK contains SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_HARDWARE. That means that there will be no option to enable HW TX timestamping without enabling software timestamping. I believe this is wrong restriction. > + > if (val & SOF_TIMESTAMPING_OPT_ID_TCP && > !(val & SOF_TIMESTAMPING_OPT_ID)) > return -EINVAL;