linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v3] mptcp: Wake up MPTCP worker when DATA

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <ef95c4e2-37ee-bb77-0472-9fd7e805eecb@tessares.net>
Date:   Mon, 21 Sep 2020 17:15:56 +0200
From:   Matthieu Baerts <matthieu.baerts@...sares.net>
To:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        mptcp@...ts.01.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Mat Martineau <mathew.j.martineau@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3] mptcp: Wake up MPTCP worker when DATA_FIN
 found on a TCP FIN packet

Hi David, Jakub,

On 21/09/2020 16:57, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> From: Mat Martineau <mathew.j.martineau@...ux.intel.com>
> 
> When receiving a DATA_FIN MPTCP option on a TCP FIN packet, the DATA_FIN
> information would be stored but the MPTCP worker did not get
> scheduled. In turn, the MPTCP socket state would remain in
> TCP_ESTABLISHED and no blocked operations would be awakened.
> 
> TCP FIN packets are seen by the MPTCP socket when moving skbs out of the
> subflow receive queues, so schedule the MPTCP worker when a skb with
> DATA_FIN but no data payload is moved from a subflow queue. Other cases
> (DATA_FIN on a bare TCP ACK or on a packet with data payload) are
> already handled.
> 
> Closes: https://github.com/multipath-tcp/mptcp_net-next/issues/84
> Fixes: 43b54c6ee382 ("mptcp: Use full MPTCP-level disconnect state machine")

A small mistake from my side, this patch is for -net and not net-next :/

Sorry, with these 3 patches with the same code, it really looks like we 
don't want to have this patch sent properly :)
I can resend a v4 with the proper subject if you prefer.

Cheers,
Matt
-- 
Tessares | Belgium | Hybrid Access Solutions
www.tessares.net