From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-172.mta0.migadu.com (out-172.mta0.migadu.com [91.218.175.172]) (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 D38A73806BE for ; Mon, 20 Apr 2026 17:09:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1776704984; cv=none; b=lhPhavu3ZDxn8btlQcNswHSredwVxqNvyf3ud/vDriMJn+D+pdF98XxbP29tInB2yfl10Rq/V38ZdyMPaT9vmBSonmT3QqmIyWg4ItKN8VQ3bJ2S5anx0vCJyKMSpMxSeZmzBU6XCso3IZJL2+mRKMQjPB4Setfxgpfhz3g9SPA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1776704984; c=relaxed/simple; bh=LUFhttCt6qq2eWwycDWvN0ipZrq6FSIlPoPYrMs4hRU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=BZDn5H5Q5KgOIlP8VMi3McKogwa82ppWPKI23pUQaFjcXXLZ/0QKPlU8rnHUJN38y4K2FEQXdp3BcyJ/HuAum6Rq2q0TBXQqwlh0XkBeCmi9kRf2en+iO93wnVROPtURp3nF+SqiXn/1IUvys02M1jm58z7p8Rb0f73TVnQ1zRs= 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=jtrtsOvW; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.172 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="jtrtsOvW" Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2026 10:09:16 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1776704967; 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=OWgmLMt7/TMrBm86Ew6P18FFPWPU3UwIA+bIKdihQo0=; b=jtrtsOvWrdt0C55JuXEg9NM9xf0uMiN1Wlr83eo+8gIcDs5bL7Y7Oq0S/8ilLMbKr0o1qv Rd1qVh0bMPrIxIPBnvZMJ7pIKCdD/+sw/xcElt2O105f3AnthA1tK5yF92+Ov/plG01zqj SwavRzIw/SRsBPYVtlNcPUOqr6aTrFI= X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Martin KaFai Lau To: KaFai Wan Cc: daniel@iogearbox.net, john.fastabend@gmail.com, sdf@fomichev.me, ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org, eddyz87@gmail.com, memxor@gmail.com, song@kernel.org, yonghong.song@linux.dev, jolsa@kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, horms@kernel.org, shuah@kernel.org, jiayuan.chen@linux.dev, bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf v3 2/2] selftests/bpf: Test TCP_NODELAY in TCP hdr opt callbacks Message-ID: <202642017513.aNTV.martin.lau@linux.dev> References: <20260417092035.2299913-1-kafai.wan@linux.dev> <20260417092035.2299913-3-kafai.wan@linux.dev> <2026417162132.9MRI.martin.lau@linux.dev> <9b3e7c118f5b9105b92f53b66034c1b7884c1372.camel@linux.dev> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <9b3e7c118f5b9105b92f53b66034c1b7884c1372.camel@linux.dev> X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT On Sat, Apr 18, 2026 at 10:19:47AM +0800, KaFai Wan wrote: > > > + ret = setsockopt(sk_fds.active_fd, SOL_TCP, TCP_NODELAY, &true_val, sizeof(true_val)); > > > > Same comment as in v2. Why this setsockopt is needed? > > Sorry I miss this. It's from the review of v1, my first version would break the syscall setsockopt > and other CB besides HDR_OPT_LEN/WRITE_HDR_OPT. So in the test I check setsockopt() and > bpf_setsockopt() in PASSIVE_ESTABLISHED_CB to make sure patch#1 would not break user space and other > CB. ic. Yep, remove it since v3 is not changing the syscall setsockopt. > > > The setsockopt in userspace is unnecessary.  > > Is bpf_setsockopt() in PASSIVE_ESTABLISHED_CB also unnecessary? I'll respin if they are unnecessary. This one is fine. It checks if the bpf_setsockopt is not affectred in other CB.