From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (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 DC6F036D9E7 for ; Wed, 6 May 2026 07:09:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778051373; cv=none; b=ge8Kud4vYwJZTXhryxpifwwcW2mNPHHv0P6FewpIKUD9INi/d4dVn6pWoF9LgLcmwOBMrJesN7KnWo1wG+3WpAMkqWWOeDJFmAvJI8vtk+fZPE+7yl3F3HO5nNTkmfhvg58bafbJcQH3h+/um15oFL7x+K1vkL2FbCwTs9cdg1c= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778051373; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ALyrwPv46yqKwQxyzn7gQrGA2L7qPbuGmptiwpmJlxE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=X3tU2PnD7UcUfFhRQIl4rG5vkRk146BIP8X8tNZmVowRrtcFNsIlGiOJ4o97oD/1Rs3WT+XF6Uz2qdOColoNgOlkwsbQbmZnjQz1Qo6OF843rJJyR/iT0gen2fnJea6msHoXbP6MxCBivM31HXQTZoA2uzo8yE1xHhEDccLD9dI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=EjODiCD3; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=Q9BQ7h4e; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="EjODiCD3"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="Q9BQ7h4e" Date: Wed, 6 May 2026 09:09:28 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1778051370; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=skBqPPEQBUoopL9X8YIMSeBd2bgYMsArj2N8aRsakek=; b=EjODiCD3qUEeWsXuhFCcRkTQ7JyALgwItDCVQJo4QoyCGO5smBjTXav84OpJYZIkEgsECx xpxuwantaOAI918cmaI2JU/gUaITkYJ4WSWexEP2p/iaFJu+6s6phmqyhoF9zzegzfmu7E SvvuWn4CF7pFlcT5sEyFOrLhWZI/WGa6iSN3dP9/7bnNthJNtGhgZyhUKCE9KhIvIYUQ5d iIqlEsu2oG4taCat3mHABGq9RzwFJRFq+gDCv7WhpL0XNS3zP+DzO4S+7ug7Uzywqeofah uYzVu0hZxrKBelmEAKHQoGzl2dJrBWZwxAe8s/2mccjd2DHZdGXUSG2b4jkqOw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1778051370; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=skBqPPEQBUoopL9X8YIMSeBd2bgYMsArj2N8aRsakek=; b=Q9BQ7h4eCyzzKm5ziOQwruW+dRpM0yCEDnqaMRJgCB9+H/ygaEkLQa6AJUH5+8zkx+ZVe5 EYJIVTZS6zppijBA== From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior To: Willem de Bruijn Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Lunn , Chintan Vankar , Danish Anwar , Daolin Qiu , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Felix Maurer , Jakub Kicinski , Neelima Muralidharan , Paolo Abeni , Praneeth Bajjuri , Pratheesh Gangadhar TK , Richard Cochran , Simon Horman , Vignesh Raghavendra Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next v3] hsr: Allow to send a specific port and with HSR header Message-ID: <20260506070928.hr8uavhJ@linutronix.de> References: <20260429-hsr_ptp-v3-1-afbf8f200f48@linutronix.de> <20260504085911.nLZLRjPF@linutronix.de> <20260505095216.T02Z4R1T@linutronix.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On 2026-05-05 12:14:58 [-0400], Willem de Bruijn wrote: > > But I can't expect that the header is always there. A random ping/ arp > > packet goes via the same flow. At the same time I don't want to make it > > mandatory for all AF_PACKET users by checking the skb's socket. > > I thought skb->protocol is the unambiguous signal whether this custom > header is present? No, I parse the header. As far as I can tell this set based on the header bits from data passed to af_packet. Even if I could change this to something else, these 16bit should better not collide with anything else so I think used the eth-type and expecting nobody sending a PTP packet is good. Sebastian