On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 6:39 PM Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Jason Xing wrote: > > From: Jason Xing <kernelxing@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Even though this case is unlikely to happen, we have to avoid such > > a case occurring at an earlier point: the sk_rmem_alloc could get > > increased because of inserting more and more skbs into the errqueue > > when calling __skb_complete_tx_timestamp(). This bad case would stop > > the socket transmitting soon. > > It is up to the application to read from the error queue frequently > enough and/or increase SO_RCVBUF. Sure thing. If we test it without setting SOF_TIMESTAMPING_SOFTWARE on the loopback, it will soon stop. That's the reason why I tried to add the restriction just in case. > > > Signed-off-by: Jason Xing <kernelxing@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > net/core/sock.c | 4 ++++ > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/net/core/sock.c b/net/core/sock.c > > index fe87f9bd8f16..4bddd6f62e4f 100644 > > --- a/net/core/sock.c > > +++ b/net/core/sock.c > > @@ -905,6 +905,10 @@ int sock_set_timestamping(struct sock *sk, int optname, > > if (val & ~SOF_TIMESTAMPING_MASK) > > return -EINVAL; > > > > + if (val & SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_RECORD_MASK && > > + !(val & SOF_TIMESTAMPING_SOFTWARE)) > > + return -EINVAL; > > + > > This breaks hardware timestamping Yes, and sorry about that. I'll fix this. > > > if (val & SOF_TIMESTAMPING_OPT_ID_TCP && > > !(val & SOF_TIMESTAMPING_OPT_ID)) > > return -EINVAL; > > -- > > 2.37.3 > > > >
