On 4/15/2024 2:22 PM, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
>>>>>> static inline void skb_set_delivery_time(struct sk_buff *skb, ktime_t kt,
>>>>>> - bool mono)
>>>>>> + u8 tstamp_type)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> skb->tstamp = kt;
>>>>>> - skb->mono_delivery_time = kt && mono;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + switch (tstamp_type) {
>>>>>> + case CLOCK_REAL:
>>>>>> + skb->tstamp_type = CLOCK_REAL;
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + case CLOCK_MONO:
>>>>>> + skb->tstamp_type = kt && tstamp_type;
>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>
>>>>> Technically this leaves the tstamp_type undefined if (skb, 0, CLOCK_REAL)
>>>> Do you think i should be checking for valid value of tstamp before setting the tstamp_type ? Only then set it.
>>>
>>> A kt of 0 is interpreted as resetting the type. That should probably
>>> be maintained.
>>>
>>> For SO_TIMESTAMPING, a mono delivery time of 0 does have some meaning.
>>> In __sock_recv_timestamp:
>>>
>>> /* Race occurred between timestamp enabling and packet
>>> receiving. Fill in the current time for now. */
>>> if (need_software_tstamp && skb->tstamp == 0) {
>>> __net_timestamp(skb);
>>> false_tstamp = 1;
>>> }
>>
>> Well in that case the above logic still resets the tstamp and sets the tstamp_type to CLOCK_REAL(value 0).
>> Anyway the tstamp_type will be 0 to begin with.
>> The logic is still inline with previous implementation, because previously if kt was 0 then kt && mono sets the tstamp_type (previously called as mono_delivery_time) to 0 (i.e SKB_CLOCK_REAL).
>
> Sorry, I got my defaults confused. If we maintain that a zero tstamp
> resets the type, then here should be no case with skb->tstamp 0 and
> skb->tstamp_type SKB_CLOCK_REAL (or SKB_CLOCK_TAI or whatever). I
> think it's preferable to make that obvious in the
> skb_set_delivery_time implementation, rather than depend on knowledge
> of its callers.
Noted!. I will do the same as part of the next patchset.
