diff mbox series

[mptcp-net,v2,11/12] mptcp: pm: ADD_ADDR 0 is not a new address

Message ID 20240816-mptcp-dup-close-evt-v2-11-8a33f6617f5c@kernel.org (mailing list archive)
State Accepted, archived
Commit cac1db6d0b631b3b92a3cb61d0044ca5f15b26dd
Delegated to: Matthieu Baerts
Headers show
Series mptcp: pm: fix re-re-create the ID 0 endpoint | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
matttbe/checkpatch success total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 checks, 33 lines checked
matttbe/shellcheck success MPTCP selftests files have not been modified
matttbe/build success Build and static analysis OK
matttbe/KVM_Validation__normal success Success! ✅
matttbe/KVM_Validation__debug success Success! ✅
matttbe/KVM_Validation__btf__only_bpftest_all_ success Success! ✅

Commit Message

Matthieu Baerts Aug. 16, 2024, 11:02 a.m. UTC
The ADD_ADDR 0 with the address from the initial subflow should not be
considered as a new address: this is not something new. If the host
receives it, it simply means that the address is available again.

When receiving an ADD_ADDR for the ID 0, the PM already doesn't consider
it as new by not incrementing the 'add_addr_accepted' counter. But the
'accept_addr' might not be set if the limit has already been reached:
this can be bypassed in this case. But before, it is important to check
that this ADD_ADDR for the ID 0 is for the same address as the initial
subflow. If not, it is not something that should happen, and the
ADD_ADDR can be ignored.

Note that if an ADD_ADDR is received while there is already a subflow
opened using the same address, this ADD_ADDR is ignored as well. It
means that if multiple ADD_ADDR for ID 0 are received, there will not be
any duplicated subflows created by the client.

Fixes: d0876b2284cf ("mptcp: add the incoming RM_ADDR support")
Signed-off-by: Matthieu Baerts (NGI0) <matttbe@kernel.org>
---
 net/mptcp/pm.c         | 4 +++-
 net/mptcp/pm_netlink.c | 9 +++++++++
 net/mptcp/protocol.h   | 2 ++
 3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/net/mptcp/pm.c b/net/mptcp/pm.c
index 56c0a318e5df..da7b2b95d568 100644
--- a/net/mptcp/pm.c
+++ b/net/mptcp/pm.c
@@ -226,7 +226,9 @@  void mptcp_pm_add_addr_received(const struct sock *ssk,
 		} else {
 			__MPTCP_INC_STATS(sock_net((struct sock *)msk), MPTCP_MIB_ADDADDRDROP);
 		}
-	} else if (!READ_ONCE(pm->accept_addr)) {
+	/* id0 should not have a different address */
+	} else if ((addr->id == 0 && !mptcp_pm_nl_is_init_remote_addr(msk, addr)) ||
+		   (addr->id > 0 && !READ_ONCE(pm->accept_addr))) {
 		mptcp_pm_announce_addr(msk, addr, true);
 		mptcp_pm_add_addr_send_ack(msk);
 	} else if (mptcp_pm_schedule_work(msk, MPTCP_PM_ADD_ADDR_RECEIVED)) {
diff --git a/net/mptcp/pm_netlink.c b/net/mptcp/pm_netlink.c
index 6a05eacd59b3..8b9580b6d643 100644
--- a/net/mptcp/pm_netlink.c
+++ b/net/mptcp/pm_netlink.c
@@ -764,6 +764,15 @@  static void mptcp_pm_nl_add_addr_received(struct mptcp_sock *msk)
 	}
 }
 
+bool mptcp_pm_nl_is_init_remote_addr(struct mptcp_sock *msk,
+				     const struct mptcp_addr_info *remote)
+{
+	struct mptcp_addr_info mpc_remote;
+
+	remote_address((struct sock_common *)msk, &mpc_remote);
+	return mptcp_addresses_equal(&mpc_remote, remote, remote->port);
+}
+
 void mptcp_pm_nl_addr_send_ack(struct mptcp_sock *msk)
 {
 	struct mptcp_subflow_context *subflow;
diff --git a/net/mptcp/protocol.h b/net/mptcp/protocol.h
index ce15e7db464b..c05c5a3cb07e 100644
--- a/net/mptcp/protocol.h
+++ b/net/mptcp/protocol.h
@@ -1004,6 +1004,8 @@  void mptcp_pm_add_addr_received(const struct sock *ssk,
 void mptcp_pm_add_addr_echoed(struct mptcp_sock *msk,
 			      const struct mptcp_addr_info *addr);
 void mptcp_pm_add_addr_send_ack(struct mptcp_sock *msk);
+bool mptcp_pm_nl_is_init_remote_addr(struct mptcp_sock *msk,
+				     const struct mptcp_addr_info *remote);
 void mptcp_pm_nl_addr_send_ack(struct mptcp_sock *msk);
 void mptcp_pm_rm_addr_received(struct mptcp_sock *msk,
 			       const struct mptcp_rm_list *rm_list);