> If I read the above correctly, you are arguining in favor of the > addittional flag version, right?
I was. Though if we are going to thread the argument from the caller to __skb_try_recv_from_queue to avoid rereading sk->sk_peek_off, on second thought it might be simpler to do it through off: @@ -511,7 +511,9 @@ static inline int sk_peek_offset(struct sock *sk, int flags) if (unlikely(flags & MSG_PEEK)) { s32 off = READ_ONCE(sk->sk_peek_off); if (off >= 0) - return off; + return off + 1; + else + return 0; } return 0; In __skb_try_recv_from_queue we can then disambiguate the two as follows: @@ -170,13 +170,19 @@ struct sk_buff *__skb_try_recv_from_queue(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff **last) { struct sk_buff *skb; - int _off = *off; + bool peek_at_off = false; + int _off = 0; + + if (flags & MSG_PEEK && *off) { + peek_at_off = true; + _off = (*off) - 1; + } *last = queue->prev; skb_queue_walk(queue, skb) { if (flags & MSG_PEEK) { - if (_off >= skb->len && (skb->len || _off || - skb->peeked)) { + if (peek_at_off && _off >= skb->len && + (skb->len || _off || skb->peeked)) { This, of course, requires restricting sk_peek_off to protect against overflow. If I'm not mistaken, the test in udp_recvmsg currently incorrectly sets peeking to false when peeking at offset zero: peeking = off = sk_peek_offset(sk, flags); > --- a/net/core/sock.c > +++ b/net/core/sock.c > @@ -2408,9 +2408,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__sk_mem_reclaim); > > int sk_set_peek_off(struct sock *sk, int val) > { > - if (val < 0) > - return -EINVAL; > - > + /* a negative value will disable peeking with offset */ > sk->sk_peek_off = val; > return 0; > } Separate patch to net-next?