On Sat, Apr 18, 2026 at 10:19:47AM +0800, KaFai Wan wrote: > > > + ret = setsockopt(sk_fds.active_fd, SOL_TCP, TCP_NODELAY, &true_val, > > > sizeof(true_val)); > > > > Same comment as in v2. Why this setsockopt is needed? > > Sorry I miss this. It's from the review of v1, my first version would break > the syscall setsockopt > and other CB besides HDR_OPT_LEN/WRITE_HDR_OPT. So in the test I check > setsockopt() and > bpf_setsockopt() in PASSIVE_ESTABLISHED_CB to make sure patch#1 would not > break user space and other > CB.
ic. Yep, remove it since v3 is not changing the syscall setsockopt. > > > The setsockopt in userspace is unnecessary. > > Is bpf_setsockopt() in PASSIVE_ESTABLISHED_CB also unnecessary? I'll respin > if they are unnecessary. This one is fine. It checks if the bpf_setsockopt is not affectred in other CB.
