From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-qv1-f54.google.com (mail-qv1-f54.google.com [209.85.219.54]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6B8141E0DBC; Tue, 8 Oct 2024 18:53:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.219.54 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728413610; cv=none; b=a+iWL906WApo90lhxTHUSJsV8hq5WmU8WcV3kIBYXHuYgmRMooSfYc7ETvGVf2J6Ik5cKgofCN27vO0QKd4R/cQRu5h790YOZdCZASvjbj6a9uU6NKb41L0hiqaNQaT/b5ADGfD7Mq7VSshEWZCyZ4Z1XZ38wcPd0ZKWvWqNDlg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728413610; c=relaxed/simple; bh=KGoNBJ/yrsPNDVuXg/ycecnzbr5CFED/NOXAMtue9hE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:Subject: Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=CsqByaZJscfQpiYmIF/uUXeShLsoXa9sGlJlCKZLDEGmrQ47RffZITSdCfXnpvBedHhX5XOPIcnW/EMe3NdGwqEZxswPAWcnENpJauodvVK+znxKUPQeq/cSG+LFFZ0AqydkHujfkms1hILMytDVOJuv2kJbtu2R7oZWnR1zI8Y= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=cZsUIaEb; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.219.54 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="cZsUIaEb" Received: by mail-qv1-f54.google.com with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-6cbbe3f6931so9192236d6.0; Tue, 08 Oct 2024 11:53:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1728413608; x=1729018408; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:references :in-reply-to:message-id:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=2XGyoBfuElsWyctT3u1Z9dYYx4xNAXCTSvtWmXn5PB8=; b=cZsUIaEbHm4fUHk2xnFqwK27HXnIEM5VMLpI7ORRYpFvLTMSmA3OX3Dc1WdpTphXXJ VBEeAGTo5Q0WqQgy35nrYLzb5DzSZiSU+sIVpGuVEF/HPuyCqaU4LmHCklUU7Ss+bVoE XNG9BFmOY1UXPYQCyya5+9bXvFpVhw38QNkVIcO0Bhky0hXLpqaf70xMQcYjMZSRy3vj 326IH/Fd91V/AloJCSn9Z90A6S9A/UqDjuR8cR9qNps5P7zN3uWubabLp/cUyAzLvuHS zxMryY1NyvsxDxMQvchAwTIFALfnJqXO5AkY7TpPE2dpzl0xSTKuP/xs9v6IU95gBy0R THEA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1728413608; x=1729018408; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:references :in-reply-to:message-id:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=2XGyoBfuElsWyctT3u1Z9dYYx4xNAXCTSvtWmXn5PB8=; b=Ief3XlK4aAYOBzpmsWaJB9JGuY+J04xXvdgfjCCWnYT/nRe+4g5xAUJmVn+y4A9qUK bNgjicCrOZ1xaSdjPMu0f5+tOsgOGeV2Ut006YRvpqrJpTbngtC9RpjxIMdvZHca0JGI SUtVBMnWVy+Mv6PJ0UxNwZvPkewvBOMzSZ1E07E00zZbbMU1NU3FXEbIQCgkq4+YLhCB fBM1NsUOe1hxnqhcNB6tIfn7K9qTKYMmrf77TE09kd+kLcENLOjUrdLPzhG1yHsmAWOT zNn63djeHy7UeKlB2sQeGLNTH6x8F5dSgE3tja3CBMHRnnLZ74Jdicv4vXxg4FIDrcp8 r4Tw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVDQ93aeR+TfV2S5tO0rkAqR+bhZrYVjT2VDFbJfkh3FqNftPaR+f2fTS1lfcHJYpm7hbJXcuw=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyzZWAMtNhkEVRLTZUf3NPSNe2ldTSCdxPTh2X0Ow8auJi/iZOa H/vTvJRr/PTkh7UlFoxI+jXGLa4JypkmIInZJ3wSlf+iJHXJNo6s X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFg6z2xnHs42GOM8zNIfptNFPO8BIaao6dI79HbBSfM6bwCG9m0B8S/M92lvOeML3N5lobXEw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:3c9d:b0:6c3:643d:3b with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-6cb9a491b1cmr295120706d6.42.1728413608109; Tue, 08 Oct 2024 11:53:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (86.235.150.34.bc.googleusercontent.com. [34.150.235.86]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 6a1803df08f44-6cba4773f41sm37455176d6.142.2024.10.08.11.53.27 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 08 Oct 2024 11:53:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2024 14:53:27 -0400 From: Willem de Bruijn To: Jason Xing , davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, dsahern@kernel.org, willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com, willemb@google.com, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org, martin.lau@linux.dev, eddyz87@gmail.com, song@kernel.org, yonghong.song@linux.dev, john.fastabend@gmail.com, kpsingh@kernel.org, sdf@fomichev.me, haoluo@google.com, jolsa@kernel.org Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Jason Xing Message-ID: <67057fa71f8a9_1a41992946d@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch> In-Reply-To: <20241008095109.99918-6-kerneljasonxing@gmail.com> References: <20241008095109.99918-1-kerneljasonxing@gmail.com> <20241008095109.99918-6-kerneljasonxing@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 5/9] net-timestamp: ready to turn on the button to generate tx timestamps 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-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jason Xing wrote: > From: Jason Xing > > Once we set BPF_SOCK_OPS_TX_TIMESTAMP_OPT_CB_FLAG flag here, there > are three points in the previous patches where generating timestamps > works. Let us make the basic bpf mechanism for timestamping feature > work finally. > > We can use like this as a simple example in bpf program: > __section("sockops") > > case BPF_SOCK_OPS_TX_TIMESTAMP_OPT_CB: > dport = bpf_ntohl(skops->remote_port); > sport = skops->local_port; > skops->reply = SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_SCHED; > bpf_sock_ops_cb_flags_set(skops, BPF_SOCK_OPS_TX_TIMESTAMP_OPT_CB_FLAG); > case BPF_SOCK_OPS_TS_SCHED_OPT_CB: > bpf_printk(...); > > Signed-off-by: Jason Xing > /* List of TCP states. There is a build check in net/ipv4/tcp.c to detect > diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp.c b/net/ipv4/tcp.c > index 82cc4a5633ce..ddf4089779b5 100644 > --- a/net/ipv4/tcp.c > +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp.c > @@ -477,12 +477,37 @@ void tcp_init_sock(struct sock *sk) > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL(tcp_init_sock); > > +static u32 bpf_tcp_tx_timestamp(struct sock *sk) > +{ > + u32 flags; > + > + flags = tcp_call_bpf(sk, BPF_SOCK_OPS_TX_TS_OPT_CB, 0, NULL); > + if (flags <= 0) > + return 0; > + > + if (flags & ~SOF_TIMESTAMPING_MASK) > + return 0; > + > + if (!(flags & SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_RECORD_MASK)) > + return 0; > + > + return flags; > +} > + > static void tcp_tx_timestamp(struct sock *sk, struct sockcm_cookie *sockc) > { > struct sk_buff *skb = tcp_write_queue_tail(sk); > u32 tsflags = sockc->tsflags; > + u32 flags; > + > + if (!skb) > + return; > + > + flags = bpf_tcp_tx_timestamp(sk); > + if (flags) > + tsflags = flags; So this feature overwrites the flags set by the user? Ideally we would use an entirely separate field for BPF admin timestamping requests. > > - if (tsflags && skb) { > + if (tsflags) { > struct skb_shared_info *shinfo = skb_shinfo(skb); > struct tcp_skb_cb *tcb = TCP_SKB_CB(skb);