On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 10:57 AM Vincent Whitchurch <vincent.whitchurch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 9, 2025 at 9:21 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Can we not override proto_ops in tcp_bpf for some specific reason? > > TLS does that, IIUC. > > I see that TLS writes to sk->sk_socket->ops to override the proto_ops. > I added some prints to tcp_bpf_update_proto() but there I see that > sk->sk_socket is NULL in some code paths, like the one below. To expand on this: TLS is able to override the sk->sk_socket->ops since it can only be installed on the socket via setsockopt(2). tcp_bpf on the other hand allows being installed on passively established sockets before they have a sk->sk_socket assigned via accept(2). So, AFAICS, we can't use the same override mechanism as TLS.
