Re: [PATCH bpf-next v11 08/12] bpf: add BPF_SOCK_OPS_TS_HW_OPT_CB callback

[Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>]

Jason Xing wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 15, 2025 at 11:06 PM Willem de Bruijn
> <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Jason Xing wrote:
> > > Support hw SCM_TSTAMP_SND case for bpf timestamping.
> > >
> > > Add a new sock_ops callback, BPF_SOCK_OPS_TS_HW_OPT_CB. This
> > > callback will occur at the same timestamping point as the user
> > > space's hardware SCM_TSTAMP_SND. The BPF program can use it to
> > > get the same SCM_TSTAMP_SND timestamp without modifying the
> > > user-space application.
> > >
> > > To avoid increasing the code complexity, replace SKBTX_HW_TSTAMP
> > > with SKBTX_HW_TSTAMP_NOBPF instead of changing numerous callers
> > > from driver side using SKBTX_HW_TSTAMP. The new definition of
> > > SKBTX_HW_TSTAMP means the combination tests of socket timestamping
> > > and bpf timestamping. After this patch, drivers can work under the
> > > bpf timestamping.
> > >
> > > Considering some drivers doesn't assign the skb with hardware
> > > timestamp,
> >
> > This is not for a real technical limitation, like the skb perhaps
> > being cloned or shared?
> 
> Agreed on this point. I'm kind of familiar with I40E, so I dare to say
> the reason why it doesn't assign the hwtstamp is because the skb will
> soon be destroyed, that is to say, it's pointless to assign the
> timestamp.

Makes sense.

But that does not ensure that the skb is exclusively owned. Nor that
the same is true for all drivers using this API (which is not small,
but small enough to manually review if need be).

The first two examples I happened to look at, i40e and bnx2x, both use
skb_get() to get a non-exclusive skb reference for their ptp_tx_skb.

> >
> > > this patch do the assignment and then BPF program
> > > can acquire the hwstamp from skb directly.
> >
> > If the above is not the case and it is safe to write to the skb_shinfo,
> > and only if respinning anyway, grammar:
> 
> From what I've known about various drivers (although very limited),
> it's safe to do the assignment.
> 
> >
> > s/doesn't/don't/
> > s/do/does/
> 
> Thanks for catching these things. If the re-spin is necessary, I will
> fix them all for sure.
> 
> Thanks,
> Jason