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 1E519367F52 for ; Mon, 9 Feb 2026 10:44:03 +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=1770633845; cv=none; b=NvBLOxknocO0wnsB4sXspi9QzxVGjpREaXDWXBLJvvjsYL2cZTsyPxTIre0wo+YueJ/hlGNKOxaK6IJnhh4p5qXEbW33nK9e6tX+Xj2CItacmhKdBUjW2i2RthsDJ6zo9wiEvAfmlBIi5ABN+KHYXW74+8w0YNopZZr4f2g7H5Y= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1770633845; c=relaxed/simple; bh=KPdrSSVeXDv3a0A+bKuqk0XJOqTNqwZOKoMAc0HDxIY=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=aaJjli3SHdaE+FU5vVZsZm+69tVX8CpszV3J5zFkRFaEM8Omm9lxyLI8CWA2NeVtRodQMWBzmnm+vqoykT8foALOyuSyTDs6UNzBTEGWNCkte3mEqx4Py42fumnah48xs6du7MfLUXHbK8IdIlxnKobB5zjHymTv4n89taOV1k4= 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=YF/F6hZm; 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="YF/F6hZm" Message-ID: <8e762437-69f9-40d7-bb75-3a45bef1d5d6@linux.dev> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1770633841; 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=S2IQbg3EuRQv0ZXMFr8IH+0gBnowsk1pZP6YBjPZW0Y=; b=YF/F6hZm/vwgeSDSvzouBC+ViBsrDG5LVxECAjdUZ+4Y3hs8dbRL8f8Lr5tjYqTkk00wkv PosVz6iUp/Jn28OlZEuFTuPBqz+G630U2vfAjLh+TgLm0SDYkADmydApFbXUsIqB1nJx0A oeeMw2q5as0j1+UKj2WfNjXh/URoB7Y= Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2026 10:43:55 +0000 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next v3] igb: Retrieve Tx timestamp directly from interrupt for i210 To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Willem de Bruijn Cc: Willem de Bruijn , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , Eric Dumazet , "David S. Miller" , "Loktionov, Aleksandr" , Kurt Kanzenbach , "Nguyen, Anthony L" , "Kitszel, Przemyslaw" , Paul Menzel , "Gomes, Vinicius" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , Richard Cochran , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Andrew Lunn , "intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org" , "Keller, Jacob E" References: <20260205100347.ssTBDAI_@linutronix.de> <6a0f4cbb-e8b3-4f0e-b7f1-7f9ca5cba97d@linux.dev> <20260205145104.iWinkXHv@linutronix.de> <66925f09-ef9f-4401-baec-7d4c82a68ce3@linux.dev> <20260205164341.pJvni8kA@linutronix.de> <76acd5cc-eb6f-4c56-a5e6-f6413736afbb@linux.dev> <601f0c4b-52d8-4b60-96bf-f2d65f8073d8@linux.dev> <20260209090621.GiZqTiMJ@linutronix.de> 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: <20260209090621.GiZqTiMJ@linutronix.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT On 09/02/2026 09:06, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > On 2026-02-08 11:25:40 [-0500], Willem de Bruijn wrote: >>>>> But it's more like a question to maintainers whether it is acceptable >>>>> way of "fixing" drivers or it's no-go solution >>>> >>>> Requiring OPT_TSONLY unless CAP_NET_RAW would break legacy users. >>> >>> Well, they are kinda broken already. Without OPT_TSONLY and CAP_NET_RAW all TX >>> timestamps are silently dropped. >> >> Are you referring to sysctl_tstamp_allow_data? >> >> That is enabled by default. > > Yes. If so, then we don't need the check below which requires > sk_callback_lock. > > Are SIOCSHWTSTAMP the legacy users or the ones which do not set > OPT_TSONLY? > > I would suggest to move the CAP_NET_RAW check to the point where > timestamping is getting enabled. > Also if ndo_hwtstamp_set is the preferred method of getting things done, > I could check how many old ones are can be easily converted… Looks like you are mixing things. SIOCSHWTSTAMP/ndo_hwtstamp_set are HW configuration calls while OPT_TSONLY is socket option, which is setup via setsockopt, you can find points searching for SOF_TIMESTAMPING_OPT_TSONLY in the sources, basically sock_set_timestamping() is the function to check > >>> To receive these timestamps users have to get >>> CAP_NET_RAW permission, and it will work with the updated logic as well... > > Sebastian