On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 8:37 AM Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 10:29 PM Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > The series introduces new socket timestamps that are > > y2038 safe. > > > > The time data types used for the existing socket timestamp > > options: SO_TIMESTAMP, SO_TIMESTAMPNS and SO_TIMESTAMPING > > are not y2038 safe. The series introduces SO_TIMESTAMP_NEW, > > SO_TIMESTAMPNS_NEW and SO_TIMESTAMPING_NEW to replace these. > > These new timestamps can be used on all architectures. > > > > The alternative considered was to extend the sys_setsockopt() > > by using the flags. We did not receive any strong opinions about > > either of the approaches. Hence, this was chosen, as glibc folks > > preferred this. > > > > The series does not deal with updating the internal kernel socket > > calls like rxrpc to make them y2038 safe. This will be dealt > > with separately. > > > > Note that the timestamps behavior already does not match the > > man page specific behavior: > > SIOCGSTAMP > > This ioctl should only be used if the socket option SO_TIMESTAMP > > is not set on the socket. Otherwise, it returns the timestamp of > > the last packet that was received while SO_TIMESTAMP was not set, > > or it fails if no such packet has been received, > > (i.e., ioctl(2) returns -1 with errno set to ENOENT). > > > > The recommendation is to update the man page to remove the above statement. > > > > The overview of the series is as below: > > 1. Delete asm specific socket.h when possible. > > 2. Support SO/SCM_TIMESTAMP* options only in userspace. > > 3. Rename current SO/SCM_TIMESTAMP* to SO/SCM_TIMESTAMP*_OLD. > > 3. Alter socket options so that SOCK_RCVTSTAMPNS does > > not rely on SOCK_RCVTSTAMP. > > 4. Introduce y2038 safe types for socket timestamp. > > 5. Introduce new y2038 safe socket options SO/SCM_TIMESTAMP*_NEW. > > > > Changes since v2: > > * Removed extra functions to reduce diff churn as per code review > > Thanks, Deepa. This set looks great to me. > > One issue, it does not apply cleanly to current davem-net-next/master > for me. A conflict on patch 7. It does apply cleanly on davem-net > master. Please rebase and also send with [PATCH net-next]. to be clear, with the version, so this will be [PATCH net-next v4].
