On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 9:22 AM Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 1/28/25 12:46 AM, Jason Xing wrote:
> > Introducing the lock to avoid affecting the applications which
>
> s/lock/static key/
>
> Unless it needs more static-key guards in the next re-spin, I would squash this
> one liner with patch 10.
Got it. Will do that. Thanks.
>
> > are not using timestamping bpf feature.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > net/ipv4/tcp.c | 3 ++-
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp.c b/net/ipv4/tcp.c
> > index b2f1fd216df1..a2ac57543b6d 100644
> > --- a/net/ipv4/tcp.c
> > +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp.c
> > @@ -493,7 +493,8 @@ static void tcp_tx_timestamp(struct sock *sk, struct sockcm_cookie *sockc)
> > shinfo->tskey = TCP_SKB_CB(skb)->seq + skb->len - 1;
> > }
> >
> > - if (SK_BPF_CB_FLAG_TEST(sk, SK_BPF_CB_TX_TIMESTAMPING) && skb) {
> > + if (cgroup_bpf_enabled(CGROUP_SOCK_OPS) &&
> > + SK_BPF_CB_FLAG_TEST(sk, SK_BPF_CB_TX_TIMESTAMPING) && skb) {
> > struct skb_shared_info *shinfo = skb_shinfo(skb);
> > struct tcp_skb_cb *tcb = TCP_SKB_CB(skb);
> >
>
