From: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
To: Stanislav Fomichev <stfomichev@gmail.com>
Cc: io-uring@vger.kernel.org,
Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@linux.dev>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@amazon.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] net: timestamp: add helper returning skb's tx tstamp
Date: Fri, 30 May 2025 19:44:05 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2aa5377f-23ea-44b4-a45c-7df1acb39cf0@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aDn5VKgXkYg77Qk_@mini-arch>
On 5/30/25 19:30, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> On 05/30, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
>> On 05/30, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>>> Add a helper function skb_get_tx_timestamp() that returns a tx timestamp
>>> associated with an skb from an queue queue.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>> include/net/sock.h | 4 ++++
>>> net/socket.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 2 files changed, 53 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/net/sock.h b/include/net/sock.h
>>> index 92e7c1aae3cc..b0493e82b6e3 100644
>>> --- a/include/net/sock.h
>>> +++ b/include/net/sock.h
>>> @@ -2677,6 +2677,10 @@ void __sock_recv_timestamp(struct msghdr *msg, struct sock *sk,
>>> void __sock_recv_wifi_status(struct msghdr *msg, struct sock *sk,
>>> struct sk_buff *skb);
>>>
>>> +bool skb_has_tx_timestamp(struct sk_buff *skb, struct sock *sk);
>>> +bool skb_get_tx_timestamp(struct sk_buff *skb, struct sock *sk,
>>> + struct timespec64 *ts);
>>> +
>>> static inline void
>>> sock_recv_timestamp(struct msghdr *msg, struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb)
>>> {
>>> diff --git a/net/socket.c b/net/socket.c
>>> index 9a0e720f0859..d1dc8ab28e46 100644
>>> --- a/net/socket.c
>>> +++ b/net/socket.c
>>> @@ -843,6 +843,55 @@ static void put_ts_pktinfo(struct msghdr *msg, struct sk_buff *skb,
>>> sizeof(ts_pktinfo), &ts_pktinfo);
>>> }
>>>
>>> +bool skb_has_tx_timestamp(struct sk_buff *skb, struct sock *sk)
>>> +{
>>> + u32 tsflags = READ_ONCE(sk->sk_tsflags);
>>> + struct sock_exterr_skb *serr = SKB_EXT_ERR(skb);
>>> +
>>> + if (serr->ee.ee_errno != ENOMSG ||
>>> + serr->ee.ee_origin != SO_EE_ORIGIN_TIMESTAMPING)
>>> + return false;
>>> +
>>> + /* software time stamp available and wanted */
>>> + if ((tsflags & SOF_TIMESTAMPING_SOFTWARE) && skb->tstamp)
>>> + return true;
>>> + /* hardware time stamps available and wanted */
>>> + return (tsflags & SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RAW_HARDWARE) &&
>>> + skb_hwtstamps(skb)->hwtstamp;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +bool skb_get_tx_timestamp(struct sk_buff *skb, struct sock *sk,
>>> + struct timespec64 *ts)
>>> +{
>>> + u32 tsflags = READ_ONCE(sk->sk_tsflags);
>>> + bool false_tstamp = false;
>>> + ktime_t hwtstamp;
>>> + int if_index = 0;
>>> +
>>
>> [..]
>>
>>> + if (sock_flag(sk, SOCK_RCVTSTAMP) && skb->tstamp == 0) {
>>> + __net_timestamp(skb);
>>> + false_tstamp = true;
>>> + }
>>
>> The place it was copy-pasted from (__sock_recv_timestamp) has a comment
>> about a race between packet rx and enabling the timestamp. Does the same
>> race happen here? Worth keeping the comment?
I can add the comment
> Or maybe you don't need this case at all? Since you're skipping the
> tstamp == 0 cases anyway down below... Pass 'false' to skb_is_swtx_tstamp
> instead?
__net_timestamp updates skb->tstamp, so I couldn't prove it's fine to
omit just from looking at code. But I don't know all intricacies of
timestamping, would be great someone knows a way to simplify it further.
--
Pavel Begunkov
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-30 18:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-30 12:18 [PATCH io_uring-next 0/5] io_uring cmd for tx timestamps Pavel Begunkov
2025-05-30 12:18 ` [PATCH 1/5] net: timestamp: add helper returning skb's tx tstamp Pavel Begunkov
2025-05-30 18:14 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2025-05-30 18:30 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2025-05-30 18:44 ` Pavel Begunkov [this message]
2025-06-01 13:52 ` Willem de Bruijn
2025-06-02 9:57 ` Pavel Begunkov
2025-06-02 13:31 ` Willem de Bruijn
2025-06-04 8:51 ` Pavel Begunkov
2025-06-04 13:38 ` Willem de Bruijn
2025-05-30 12:18 ` [PATCH 2/5] io_uring/poll: introduce io_arm_apoll() Pavel Begunkov
2025-05-31 10:28 ` Pavel Begunkov
2025-05-30 12:18 ` [PATCH 3/5] io_uring/cmd: allow multishot polled commands Pavel Begunkov
2025-05-30 12:18 ` [PATCH 4/5] io_uring: add mshot helper for posting CQE32 Pavel Begunkov
2025-05-30 12:18 ` [PATCH 5/5] io_uring/netcmd: add tx timestamping cmd support Pavel Begunkov
2025-05-31 8:34 ` kernel test robot
2025-05-30 13:30 ` [PATCH io_uring-next 0/5] io_uring cmd for tx timestamps Jens Axboe
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2aa5377f-23ea-44b4-a45c-7df1acb39cf0@gmail.com \
--to=asml.silence@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=io-uring@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=kuniyu@amazon.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=richardcochran@gmail.com \
--cc=stfomichev@gmail.com \
--cc=vadim.fedorenko@linux.dev \
--cc=willemb@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox