Re: [PATCH net 1/2] socket: fix option SO_TIMESTAMPING_NEW

2020-10-09 Thread Deepa Dinamani
On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 5:43 PM Willem de Bruijn wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 8:30 PM Deepa Dinamani wrote: > > > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 3:32 AM Christian Eggers wrote: > > > > > > The comparison of optname with SO_TIMESTAMPING_NEW is wrong way around, > > > so SOCK_TSTAMP_NEW will first b

Re: [PATCH net 1/2] socket: fix option SO_TIMESTAMPING_NEW

2020-10-09 Thread Willem de Bruijn
On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 8:30 PM Deepa Dinamani wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 3:32 AM Christian Eggers wrote: > > > > The comparison of optname with SO_TIMESTAMPING_NEW is wrong way around, > > so SOCK_TSTAMP_NEW will first be set and than reset again. Additionally > > move it out of the test f

Re: [PATCH net 1/2] socket: fix option SO_TIMESTAMPING_NEW

2020-10-09 Thread Deepa Dinamani
On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 3:32 AM Christian Eggers wrote: > > The comparison of optname with SO_TIMESTAMPING_NEW is wrong way around, > so SOCK_TSTAMP_NEW will first be set and than reset again. Additionally > move it out of the test for SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RX_SOFTWARE as this seems > unrelated. The SO

Re: [PATCH net 1/2] socket: fix option SO_TIMESTAMPING_NEW

2020-10-09 Thread Willem de Bruijn
On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 6:32 AM Christian Eggers wrote: > > The comparison of optname with SO_TIMESTAMPING_NEW is wrong way around, > so SOCK_TSTAMP_NEW will first be set and than reset again. Additionally > move it out of the test for SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RX_SOFTWARE as this seems > unrelated. > > Thi

[PATCH net 1/2] socket: fix option SO_TIMESTAMPING_NEW

2020-10-09 Thread Christian Eggers
The comparison of optname with SO_TIMESTAMPING_NEW is wrong way around, so SOCK_TSTAMP_NEW will first be set and than reset again. Additionally move it out of the test for SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RX_SOFTWARE as this seems unrelated. This problem happens on 32 bit platforms were the libc has already switc