Re: [PATCH 3/8] socket: Disentangle SOCK_RCVTSTAMPNS from SOCK_RCVTSTAMP

[Deepa Dinamani]

On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 7:59 PM Willem de Bruijn
<willemdebruijn.kernel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 3:59 AM Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > SOCK_RCVTSTAMPNS is never set alone. SOCK_RCVTSTAMP
> > is always set along with SOCK_RCVTSTAMPNS. This leads to
> > checking for two flag states whenever we need to check for
> > SOCK_RCVTSTAMPS.
> >
> > Also SOCK_RCVTSTAMPS was the only flag that needed to be
> > checked in order to verify if either of the two flags are
> > set. But, the two features are not actually dependent on
> > each other. This artificial dependency creates more
> > confusion.
>
> This is done so that the hot path only has to check one flag
> in the common case where no timestamp is requested.

In that case we could just check it this way:

if (newsk->sk_flags & SK_FLAGS_TIMESTAMP)

We are already doing this in many places.

I do not see any other reason for the two timestamps to be intertwined.

Do you have any objections to using this patch and replacing the
checks as above?

-Deepa