From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pj2-f5.google.com (mail-pj2-f5.google.com [74.125.227.133]) (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 560F0306B3D for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2026 18:30:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=74.125.227.133 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791225056; cv=none; b=T67ld7pmszxoDYmsW18nDq+qb1MTXIJhsaBTeL48xpddpJlJy44O4Tq//vlKXXBuXwosvL0tWPcgn7JpERg85Mb8K3ruK8tjpBSFMfLZhIPoR5Rz91+0nzIYZgeuxgsd6zJbxMhm+sPeeE4xwomMMwt0ygdzm/PPEv5Fy7KMz58= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791225056; c=relaxed/simple; bh=LHMwDqlcXSfkxv44u/ZvcB9y/jElzy1xDWD2jp55OCg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=dZDgYeYYyNInz9QDAOqmyQnu9KLq1agG9aaV4iKUWIpK2AF7bW8D5yaOSHBk49nI2kYixtuZu7W+F2Hd1FK1ok6miL2E8EHgobKQJCyHASagGguZ4F4BOMeAt8ODhYeLHngAj+ym8xtR0b90CWDHg8ND9lQappgUr5Wai5fHUNo= 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=cjsuemS/; arc=none smtp.client-ip=74.125.227.133 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="cjsuemS/" Received: by mail-pj2-f5.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-3a7adbf1b3fso373080a91.0 for ; Mon, 05 Oct 2026 11:30:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20251104; t=1791225055; x=1791829855; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=xS5HF65LoVsFRjbOhyoQkdS88ZjBoG/dqtGiSK55d78=; b=cjsuemS/06SA9o9og9VYoXpUdF7N11RNYrc03KPI9eeguId1oKSnC4J2OfMVE9k58w zdpm2d2YueSBAEHkfIyQYdYByVBzF/gxIGM+8OUkk2VbjONVB1kEQwQ3T/F6MpufvJzu DYPTNEDLna5aAAk1dCOMxfm8R1VknOoFwfJGmYQhov4LNFSyUPUdbKxDqqmAiBAYOFHs 9ZTuNFRpfkNMl8lgoRa5ylpZcxVmHfKNB7MQJWPzYZkyuwY1+eHp/G8jh3GxhdzUzyzb /wK3lG/2I+D3pKnIiUCrDfQQudw6wilOsJMENmA2r9sfIuADXKy4FGde5WDbpCAx28RA vqJA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20260707; t=1791225055; x=1791829855; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to :content-type; bh=xS5HF65LoVsFRjbOhyoQkdS88ZjBoG/dqtGiSK55d78=; b=Wpu8fQPH+DyBw4tm1CwNpQ4U15wYF8J04eDtMgIe/OCD9AyLJU/xhZcLOsctkqTP8h lWDrJEBhIIX4+bi2tvpPzJvLOzbG4HoSbYxd+djCax6qgJ9i2MKfB4yllEAC/THWdB37 6hrKl6kAJDs7sKFvJBpY/WD7fH2QIliTSQ/CI2ANBCsmXPD1VdMvYN5G+y+OT2lW3Kwz jLqy9yowDqOfOxf3SOPCP7xaKOOqNW4e3znRpHzFOArivM3gijEZOej+iHNkP7unTAXK q38SCPYoJ+lQALSVFPhpWtZhXsOTBjd/Qx+nCZ1nVZ95E1lwbXb0aRp2gfKsxyD8a7j1 XaIg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AKwUvBzjPoC9fsGYaX0uCLrryxvDRcuAfC+wogJIHPPQeLdflCMhXqJFNZ/6brxtMkDAZvyEh8U0IvY=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AFq9FYIpr+lo/lFaj4CZKy9qRpAY6ZTiklKeETZ1aq5B8c5A+EFw+1EE MQmQivytJIq7H1bUIt4wXBCakreJUzh8xoQ4gyM0lrzz73tS+qUgu0Og X-Gm-Gg: AYBFou0+i7Jx9YXNTx0302uou9zmLWNmRy48ROa0bTdjkXNqGXCBB0Ux/ouxnmGsW9j 4m56c/kn3zK5qta7nsC2l/2r9w7dqbX/FI2UyK72LPF8ZS3oY7yDG0okIImax/+4wziIHvcmJNd sxVIqdxFvQej8BTnFl7JWyGFbWqQo7RFfmhLD4zyfSYKGCXtSWb7KdSaeg86KriYkPJB7enK4fn 6DSdHD4q0Im1rVkJFdbhFnFV/zN3W/MH5E/GQy3nKPzUhaC632w5KFVNGrqRi9S4XyOewH+qfJ7 1HJDLcXOYYhE5+dhgEe2V1COUuHPrO3TWexFL+Bn01WLiR838opDztUskVc3/8X0GBwp6M19n/M 3kcnlOtOGPaiOmxSJLft7OX3zWXgADqh8sMIZL8xza3qyUNbxaVoG/w+JoBlzQKIH2UQlZn2OCo gfVchv+WJRinF3UKEQwOIbiIM1/kI9PeOEGryiHZ94VbJqOaBAA6Y7FlDsvPWs7Kun X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:4a86:b0:3a7:da33:ff3d with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-3a7da34065bmr4683519a91.46.1791225054557; Mon, 05 Oct 2026 11:30:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2a03:2880:2ff:4c::]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 98e67ed59e1d1-3a853cea0f1sm646225a91.15.2026.10.05.11.30.53 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 05 Oct 2026 11:30:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2026 11:30:46 -0700 From: Stanislav Fomichev To: Kuniyuki Iwashima Cc: Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Andrii Nakryiko , Martin KaFai Lau , Eduard Zingerman , Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi , Amery Hung , Yonghong Song , John Fastabend , Stanislav Fomichev , Eric Dumazet , Neal Cardwell , Willem de Bruijn , Tenzin Ukyab , =?utf-8?B?Q2zDqW1lbnQgTMOpZ2Vy?= , Kuniyuki Iwashima , bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 bpf-next 2/9] bpf: tcp: Add a new per-socket flag and kfunc for bpf_tcp_ops. Message-ID: References: <20261005154533.4147685-1-kuniyu@google.com> <20261005154533.4147685-3-kuniyu@google.com> 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: <20261005154533.4147685-3-kuniyu@google.com> On 10/05, Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote: > The legacy SOCK_OPS guards some hooks with a per-socket flag, > tp->bpf_sock_ops_cb_flags. > > In contrast, bpf_tcp_ops was initially designed without per-socket > flags so that users can simply define only the callbacks they need. > > However, it turned out that even attaching a bpf_tcp_ops with a NULL > callback incurs measurable overhead in the fast path. [0] > > We could reuse tp->bpf_sock_ops_cb_flags, but it is u8 and has only > 1 bit left for a new opt-in callback, while not all of the 7 existing > opt-in hooks are in the fast path and really need a flag guard. > > Moreover, tp->bpf_sock_ops_cb_flags has two bpf helper functions to > update it, both of which require sock_owned_by_me(sk): > > * bpf_sock_ops_cb_flags_set() > * bpf_setsockopt(TCP_BPF_SOCK_OPS_CB_FLAGS) Can we return -EINVAL from these when used with sock_ops? If we keep one flag we can presumably put both tcp_call_bpf_Xarg and bpf_tcp_ops_call under the same if conditional?