Message ID | 20231025-send-net-next-20231025-v1-3-db8f25f798eb@kernel.org (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | Mainlined, archived |
Delegated to: | Mat Martineau |
Headers | show |
Series | mptcp: Fixes and cleanup for v6.7 | expand |
On Wed, 25 Oct 2023 16:37:04 -0700 Mat Martineau wrote: > Fixes: d9a4594edabf ("mptcp: netlink: Add MPTCP_PM_CMD_REMOVE") > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org CC: stable@ + net-next really doesn't make sense. Either it's important or it's not. Which one do you pick?
Hi Mat, On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 08:26:29PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Wed, 25 Oct 2023 16:37:04 -0700 Mat Martineau wrote: > > Fixes: d9a4594edabf ("mptcp: netlink: Add MPTCP_PM_CMD_REMOVE") > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > CC: stable@ + net-next really doesn't make sense. > Either it's important or it's not. Which one do you pick? 'Cc: stable@' in the first two patches should be dropped too. Thanks, -Geliang
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Wed, 25 Oct 2023 16:37:04 -0700 Mat Martineau wrote: >> Fixes: d9a4594edabf ("mptcp: netlink: Add MPTCP_PM_CMD_REMOVE") >> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > CC: stable@ + net-next really doesn't make sense. > Either it's important or it's not. Which one do you pick? > Hi Jakub - This is what I was attempting to explain in the cover letter: > This series includes three initial patches that we had queued in our > mptcp-net branch, but given the likely timing of net/net-next syncs this > week, the need to avoid introducing branch conflicts, and another batch > of net-next patches pending in the mptcp tree, the most practical route > is to send everything for net-next. So, that's the reasoning, but I'll send v2 without the cc's. - Mat
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 08:34:27 -0700 (PDT) Mat Martineau wrote: > > This series includes three initial patches that we had queued in our > > mptcp-net branch, but given the likely timing of net/net-next syncs this > > week, the need to avoid introducing branch conflicts, and another batch > > of net-next patches pending in the mptcp tree, the most practical route > > is to send everything for net-next. > > So, that's the reasoning, but I'll send v2 without the cc's. No need, I can strip when applying.
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 08:34:27 -0700 (PDT) Mat Martineau wrote: >>> This series includes three initial patches that we had queued in our >>> mptcp-net branch, but given the likely timing of net/net-next syncs this >>> week, the need to avoid introducing branch conflicts, and another batch >>> of net-next patches pending in the mptcp tree, the most practical route >>> is to send everything for net-next. >> >> So, that's the reasoning, but I'll send v2 without the cc's. > > No need, I can strip when applying. > Thanks Jakub, appreciate this! - Mat
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 08:45:53 -0700 (PDT) Mat Martineau wrote: > > No need, I can strip when applying. > > Thanks Jakub, appreciate this! What's the reset of the stuff you have for 6.7, tho? The net-next PR comes out today, unless it's really trivial cleanups and/or selftest changes it's probably already too late :( Assuming MW doesn't get postponed.
diff --git a/net/mptcp/pm_userspace.c b/net/mptcp/pm_userspace.c index 0f92e5b13a8a..25fa37ac3620 100644 --- a/net/mptcp/pm_userspace.c +++ b/net/mptcp/pm_userspace.c @@ -208,6 +208,40 @@ int mptcp_pm_nl_announce_doit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct genl_info *info) return err; } +static int mptcp_userspace_pm_remove_id_zero_address(struct mptcp_sock *msk, + struct genl_info *info) +{ + struct mptcp_rm_list list = { .nr = 0 }; + struct mptcp_subflow_context *subflow; + struct sock *sk = (struct sock *)msk; + bool has_id_0 = false; + int err = -EINVAL; + + lock_sock(sk); + mptcp_for_each_subflow(msk, subflow) { + if (subflow->local_id == 0) { + has_id_0 = true; + break; + } + } + if (!has_id_0) { + GENL_SET_ERR_MSG(info, "address with id 0 not found"); + goto remove_err; + } + + list.ids[list.nr++] = 0; + + spin_lock_bh(&msk->pm.lock); + mptcp_pm_remove_addr(msk, &list); + spin_unlock_bh(&msk->pm.lock); + + err = 0; + +remove_err: + release_sock(sk); + return err; +} + int mptcp_pm_nl_remove_doit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct genl_info *info) { struct nlattr *token = info->attrs[MPTCP_PM_ATTR_TOKEN]; @@ -239,6 +273,11 @@ int mptcp_pm_nl_remove_doit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct genl_info *info) goto remove_err; } + if (id_val == 0) { + err = mptcp_userspace_pm_remove_id_zero_address(msk, info); + goto remove_err; + } + lock_sock((struct sock *)msk); list_for_each_entry(entry, &msk->pm.userspace_pm_local_addr_list, list) {