From: Yonglong Li <liyonglong@chinatelecom.cn>
To: Geliang Tang <geliangtang@gmail.com>
Cc: mptcp@lists.linux.dev,
Mat Martineau <mathew.j.martineau@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/4] mptcp: build ADD_ADDR/echo-ADD_ADDR option according pm.add_signal
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 09:30:25 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <14a8296f-cd3e-dc1d-68fe-b0f0e67930d4@chinatelecom.cn> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+WQbwuAkExnpvCMLQAQ=Z2uKApJJ+tZZb4p06Zf+YPznovOWw@mail.gmail.com>
On 2021/6/29 16:25, Geliang Tang wrote:
> Yonglong Li <liyonglong@chinatelecom.cn> 于2021年6月29日周二 下午3:54写道：
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2021/6/29 15:35, Geliang Tang wrote:
>>> Yonglong Li <liyonglong@chinatelecom.cn> 于2021年6月29日周二 下午3:02写道：
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Geiliang, Thanks for your reviews.
>>>>
>>>> On 2021/6/29 13:58, Geliang Tang wrote:
>>>>> Yonglong Li <liyonglong@chinatelecom.cn> 于2021年6月29日周二 上午9:42写道：
>>>>>>
>>>>>> according MPTCP_ADD_ADDR_SIGNAL and MPTCP_ADD_ADDR_ECHO flag build
>>>>>> ADD_ADDR/echo-ADD_ADDR option
>>>>>>
>>>>>> add a suboptions type OPTION_MPTCP_ADD_ECHO to mark as echo option
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Yonglong Li <liyonglong@chinatelecom.cn>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> include/net/mptcp.h | 3 ++-
>>>>>> net/mptcp/options.c | 65 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
>>>>>> net/mptcp/pm.c | 33 +++++++++++---------------
>>>>>> net/mptcp/protocol.h | 23 ++++++++++++-------
>>>>>> 4 files changed, 69 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/include/net/mptcp.h b/include/net/mptcp.h
>>>>>> index d61bbbf..d2c6ebe 100644
>>>>>> --- a/include/net/mptcp.h
>>>>>> +++ b/include/net/mptcp.h
>>>>>> @@ -61,7 +61,8 @@ struct mptcp_out_options {
>>>>>> u64 sndr_key;
>>>>>> u64 rcvr_key;
>>>>>> u64 ahmac;
>>>>>> - struct mptcp_addr_info addr;
>>>>>> + struct mptcp_addr_info local;
>>>>>> + struct mptcp_addr_info remote;
>>>>>> struct mptcp_rm_list rm_list;
>>>>>> u8 join_id;
>>>>>> u8 backup;
>>>>>> diff --git a/net/mptcp/options.c b/net/mptcp/options.c
>>>>>> index 1aec016..1707bec 100644
>>>>>> --- a/net/mptcp/options.c
>>>>>> +++ b/net/mptcp/options.c
>>>>>> @@ -655,13 +655,15 @@ static bool mptcp_established_options_add_addr(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *
>>>>>> struct mptcp_sock *msk = mptcp_sk(subflow->conn);
>>>>>> bool drop_other_suboptions = false;
>>>>>> unsigned int opt_size = *size;
>>>>>> - bool echo;
>>>>>> - bool port;
>>>>>> - int len;
>>>>>> + u8 add_addr, flags = 0xff;
>>>>>> + int len = 0;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - if ((mptcp_pm_should_add_signal_ipv6(msk) ||
>>>>>> - mptcp_pm_should_add_signal_port(msk) ||
>>>>>> - mptcp_pm_should_add_signal_echo(msk)) &&
>>>>>> + if (!mptcp_pm_add_addr_signal(msk, opts, &add_addr))
>>>>>> + return false;
>>>>>
>>>>> This add_addr argument is useless, let's drop it.
>>>>>
>>>> we can use add_addr use in debug log.
>>>
>>> I think it's not worth adding a new argument just for debugging.
>> agree.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> And here add back mptcp_pm_should_add_signal check here. The original code
>>>>> called mptcp_pm_should_add_signal twice for double check, once out of pm
>>>>> lock, once under pm lock. We should keep it.
>>>> Sorry, I think double check is not necessary. does we need double check?
>>>
>>> I think we should keep the original logic here. If we want to drop this
>>> double check or something, we should do it in another patch, don't mix too
>>> much things in one patch.
>> agree.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if ((mptcp_pm_should_add_signal_echo(msk) ||
>>>>>> + (mptcp_pm_should_add_signal_addr(msk) &&
>>>>>> + (opts->local.family == AF_INET6 || opts->local.port))) &&
>>>>>> skb && skb_is_tcp_pure_ack(skb)) {
>>>>>> pr_debug("drop other suboptions");
>>>>>> opts->suboptions = 0;
>>>>>> @@ -671,11 +673,17 @@ static bool mptcp_established_options_add_addr(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *
>>>>>> drop_other_suboptions = true;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - if (!mptcp_pm_should_add_signal(msk) ||
>>>>>> - !(mptcp_pm_add_addr_signal(msk, remaining, &opts->addr, &echo, &port)))
>>>>>> - return false;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - len = mptcp_add_addr_len(opts->addr.family, echo, port);
>>>>>> + if (mptcp_pm_should_add_signal_echo(msk)) {
>>>>>> + flags = (u8)~BIT(MPTCP_ADD_ADDR_ECHO);
>>>>>> + } else {
>>>>>> + opts->ahmac = add_addr_generate_hmac(msk->local_key,
>>>>>> + msk->remote_key,
>>>>>> + &opts->local);
>>>>>
>>>>> Keep this ahmac generating code after opts->suboptions set just like the
>>>>> original code, since ahmac is the more expensive to populate. If remaining
>>>>> length isn't enough, no need to set ahmac.
>>>>
>>>> because mptcp_add_addr_len(opts) will use ahmac to calculate len of opts, so I think Keep this ahmac
>>>> generating code after opts->suboptions set is not ok.
>>>
>>> So we should use mptcp_pm_should_add_signal_addr instead of opts->ahmac in
>>> mptcp_add_addr_len.
>> agree.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> + flags = (u8)~BIT(MPTCP_ADD_ADDR_SIGNAL);
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + len = mptcp_add_addr_len(opts);
>>>>>> if (remaining < len)
>>>>>> return false;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> @@ -683,13 +691,14 @@ static bool mptcp_established_options_add_addr(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *
>>>>>> if (drop_other_suboptions)
>>>>>> *size -= opt_size;
>>>>>> opts->suboptions |= OPTION_MPTCP_ADD_ADDR;
>>>>>> - if (!echo) {
>>>>>> - opts->ahmac = add_addr_generate_hmac(msk->local_key,
>>>>>> - msk->remote_key,
>>>>>> - &opts->addr);
>>>>>> - }
>>>>>> - pr_debug("addr_id=%d, ahmac=%llu, echo=%d, port=%d",
>>>>>> - opts->addr.id, opts->ahmac, echo, ntohs(opts->addr.port));
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + spin_lock_bh(&msk->pm.lock);
>>>>>> + WRITE_ONCE(msk->pm.addr_signal, flags & msk->pm.addr_signal);
>>>>>> + spin_unlock_bh(&msk->pm.lock);
>>>>>
>>>>> addr_signal has been set in mptcp_pm_add_addr_signal in patch 1, no need to
>>>>> set it again. I thinks this trunk and all the flags set above should be
>>>>> dropped.
>>>>
>>>> Because MPTCP_ADD_ADDR_SIGNAL and MPTCP_ADD_ADDR_ECHO maybe set at the same time.
>>>> So i think we should only unset one flag.
>>>
>>> We can only unset one flag in mptcp_pm_add_addr_signal, see my comment in
>>> patch 1.
>>
>> if change like this. there is a issue: if remaining len checking is not ok and return false, The ADD_ADDR/ECHO event will
>> be clear. So I think we should make sure ADD_ADDR/ECHO option will add in packet before clean flags. WDYT?
>>
>
> You're right, let's clear it in mptcp_established_options_add_addr.
> Furthermore, we should do the same thing for RM_ADDR, clear rm_addr in
> mptcp_established_options_rm_addr too.
>
> If so, patch 1 will become useless. Let's drop it.
>
> -Geliang
> I think RM_ADDR doesn't have this issue. Because mptcp_pm_rm_addr_signal() check the failed case.
>
>
>>>
>>> -Geliang
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + pr_debug("addr_signal:%x, echo=%d, local_addr_id=%d, ahmac=%llu, local_port=%d, remote_addr_id=%d, remote_port=%d",
>>>>>> + add_addr, (opts->ahmac == 0), opts->local.id,
>>>>>> + opts->ahmac, ntohs(opts->local.port), opts->remote.id, ntohs(opts->remote.port));
>>>>>>
>>>>>> return true;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> The whole function is something like this:
>>>>> '''
>>>>> struct mptcp_subflow_context *subflow = mptcp_subflow_ctx(sk);
>>>>> struct mptcp_sock *msk = mptcp_sk(subflow->conn);
>>>>> bool drop_other_suboptions = false;
>>>>> unsigned int opt_size = *size;
>>>>> int len;
>>>>>
>>>>> if (!mptcp_pm_should_add_signal(msk) ||
>>>>> !mptcp_pm_add_addr_signal(msk, remaining, opts))
>>>>> return false;
>>>>>
>>>>> if ((mptcp_pm_should_add_signal_echo(msk) ||
>>>>> (mptcp_pm_should_add_signal_addr(msk) &&
>>>>> (opts->local.family == AF_INET6 || opts->local.port))) &&
>>>>> skb && skb_is_tcp_pure_ack(skb)) {
>>>>> pr_debug("drop other suboptions");
>>>>> opts->suboptions = 0;
>>>>> opts->ext_copy.use_ack = 0;
>>>>> opts->ext_copy.use_map = 0;
>>>>> remaining += opt_size;
>>>>> drop_other_suboptions = true;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> len = mptcp_add_addr_len(opts);
>>>>> if (remaining < len)
>>>>> return false;
>>>>>
>>>>> *size = len;
>>>>> if (drop_other_suboptions)
>>>>> *size -= opt_size;
>>>>> opts->suboptions |= OPTION_MPTCP_ADD_ADDR;
>>>>> if (mptcp_pm_should_add_signal_addr(msk)) {
>>>>> opts->ahmac = add_addr_generate_hmac(msk->local_key,
>>>>> msk->remote_key,
>>>>> &opts->local);
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> pr_debug("addr_signal:%x, echo=%d, local_addr_id=%d,
>>>>> ahmac=%llu, local_port=%d, remote_addr_id=%d, remote_port=%d",
>>>>> msk->pm.addr_signal, (opts->ahmac == 0), opts->local.id,
>>>>> opts->ahmac, ntohs(opts->local.port),
>>>>> opts->remote.id, ntohs(opts->remote.port));
>>>>>
>>>>> return true;
>>>>> '''
>>>>>
>>>>>> @@ -1229,15 +1238,19 @@ void mptcp_write_options(__be32 *ptr, const struct tcp_sock *tp,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> mp_capable_done:
>>>>>> if (OPTION_MPTCP_ADD_ADDR & opts->suboptions) {
>>>>>> + struct mptcp_addr_info *addr = &opts->remote;
>>>>>
>>>>> We can simplify it like this:
>>>>> struct mptcp_addr_info *addr = opts->ahmac ? &opts->local :
>>>>> &opts->remote;
>>>>>
>>>>>> u8 len = TCPOLEN_MPTCP_ADD_ADDR_BASE;
>>>>>> u8 echo = MPTCP_ADDR_ECHO;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> + if (opts->ahmac)
>>>>>> + addr = &opts->local;
>>>>>
>>>>> And this trunk can be dropped.
>>>>>
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MPTCP_IPV6)
>>>>>> - if (opts->addr.family == AF_INET6)
>>>>>> + if (addr->family == AF_INET6)
>>>>>> len = TCPOLEN_MPTCP_ADD_ADDR6_BASE;
>>>>>> #endif
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - if (opts->addr.port)
>>>>>> + if (addr->port)
>>>>>> len += TCPOLEN_MPTCP_PORT_LEN;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> if (opts->ahmac) {
>>>>>> @@ -1246,25 +1259,25 @@ void mptcp_write_options(__be32 *ptr, const struct tcp_sock *tp,
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *ptr++ = mptcp_option(MPTCPOPT_ADD_ADDR,
>>>>>> - len, echo, opts->addr.id);
>>>>>> - if (opts->addr.family == AF_INET) {
>>>>>> - memcpy((u8 *)ptr, (u8 *)&opts->addr.addr.s_addr, 4);
>>>>>> + len, echo, addr->id);
>>>>>> + if (addr->family == AF_INET) {
>>>>>> + memcpy((u8 *)ptr, (u8 *)&addr->addr.s_addr, 4);
>>>>>> ptr += 1;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MPTCP_IPV6)
>>>>>> - else if (opts->addr.family == AF_INET6) {
>>>>>> - memcpy((u8 *)ptr, opts->addr.addr6.s6_addr, 16);
>>>>>> + else if (addr->family == AF_INET6) {
>>>>>> + memcpy((u8 *)ptr, addr->addr6.s6_addr, 16);
>>>>>> ptr += 4;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> #endif
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - if (!opts->addr.port) {
>>>>>> + if (!addr->port) {
>>>>>> if (opts->ahmac) {
>>>>>> put_unaligned_be64(opts->ahmac, ptr);
>>>>>> ptr += 2;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> } else {
>>>>>> - u16 port = ntohs(opts->addr.port);
>>>>>> + u16 port = ntohs(addr->port);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> if (opts->ahmac) {
>>>>>> u8 *bptr = (u8 *)ptr;
>>>>>> diff --git a/net/mptcp/pm.c b/net/mptcp/pm.c
>>>>>> index cf873e9..9c621293 100644
>>>>>> --- a/net/mptcp/pm.c
>>>>>> +++ b/net/mptcp/pm.c
>>>>>> @@ -253,32 +253,25 @@ void mptcp_pm_mp_prio_received(struct sock *sk, u8 bkup)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /* path manager helpers */
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -bool mptcp_pm_add_addr_signal(struct mptcp_sock *msk, unsigned int remaining,
>>>>>> - struct mptcp_addr_info *saddr, bool *echo, bool *port)
>>>>>> +bool mptcp_pm_add_addr_signal(struct mptcp_sock *msk, struct mptcp_out_options *opts,
>>>>>> + u8 *add_addr)
>>>>>
>>>>> Drop this add_addr argument.
>>>>>
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> - u8 add_addr;
>>>>>> - int ret = false;
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> spin_lock_bh(&msk->pm.lock);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - /* double check after the lock is acquired */
>>>>>> - if (!mptcp_pm_should_add_signal(msk))
>>>>>> - goto out_unlock;
>>>>>
>>>>> Keep this double check code.
>>>>>
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> - *echo = mptcp_pm_should_add_signal_echo(msk);
>>>>>> - *port = mptcp_pm_should_add_signal_port(msk);
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> - if (remaining < mptcp_add_addr_len(msk->pm.local.family, *echo, *port))
>>>>>> - goto out_unlock;
>>>>>
>>>>> Keep this length double check code too.
>>>>>
>>>>>> + if (!mptcp_pm_should_add_signal(msk)) {
>>>>>> + spin_unlock_bh(&msk->pm.lock);
>>>>>> + return false;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - *saddr = msk->pm.local;
>>>>>> - add_addr = msk->pm.addr_signal & ~(BIT(MPTCP_ADD_ADDR_SIGNAL) | BIT(MPTCP_ADD_ADDR_ECHO));
>>>>> - WRITE_ONCE(msk->pm.addr_signal, add_addr);
>>>>>
>>>>> This code is just added in patch 1, I think we should keep it. And no need
>>>>> to write addr_signal again in mptcp_established_options_add_addr.
>>>>>
>>>>>> - ret = true;
>>>>>> + opts->local = msk->pm.local;
>>>>>> + opts->remote = msk->pm.remote;
>>>>>> + *add_addr = msk->pm.addr_signal;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -out_unlock:
>>>>>> spin_unlock_bh(&msk->pm.lock);
>>>>>> - return ret;
>>>>>
>>>>> Keep this out_unlock code.
>>>>>
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if ((mptcp_pm_should_add_signal_echo(msk)) && (mptcp_pm_should_add_signal_addr(msk)))
>>>>>> + mptcp_pm_schedule_work(msk, MPTCP_PM_ADD_ADDR_SEND_ACK);
>>>>>
>>>>> Could we use mptcp_pm_add_addr_send_ack here instead of open coding?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm no sure why we need this two lines, and why you use '&&' here. Do you
>>>>> mean set MPTCP_ADD_ADDR_SIGNAL and MPTCP_ADD_ADDR_ECHO at the same time?
>>>>>
>>>>>> + return true;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> The whole function is something like this:
>>>>> '''
>>>>> int ret = false;
>>>>> u8 add_addr;
>>>>>
>>>>> spin_lock_bh(&msk->pm.lock);
>>>>>
>>>>> /* double check after the lock is acquired */
>>>>> if (!mptcp_pm_should_add_signal(msk))
>>>>> goto out_unlock;
>>>>>
>>>>> if (remaining < mptcp_add_addr_len(opts))
>>>>> goto out_unlock;
>>>>>
>>>>> opts->local = msk->pm.local;
>>>>> opts->remote = msk->pm.remote;
>>>>> if (mptcp_pm_should_add_signal_echo(msk))
>>>>> add_addr = msk->pm.addr_signal & ~BIT(MPTCP_ADD_ADDR_ECHO);
>>>>> else
>>>>> add_addr = msk->pm.addr_signal & ~BIT(MPTCP_ADD_ADDR_SIGNAL);
>>>>> WRITE_ONCE(msk->pm.addr_signal, add_addr);
>>>>> ret = true;
>>>>>
>>>>> out_unlock:
>>>>> spin_unlock_bh(&msk->pm.lock);
>>>>> if (ret && mptcp_pm_should_add_signal_echo(msk) &&
>>>>> mptcp_pm_should_add_signal_addr(msk))
>>>>> mptcp_pm_schedule_work(msk, MPTCP_PM_ADD_ADDR_SEND_ACK);
>>>>> return ret;
>>>>> '''
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> bool mptcp_pm_rm_addr_signal(struct mptcp_sock *msk, unsigned int remaining,
>>>>>> diff --git a/net/mptcp/protocol.h b/net/mptcp/protocol.h
>>>>>> index a0b0ec0..0bfbbdef 100644
>>>>>> --- a/net/mptcp/protocol.h
>>>>>> +++ b/net/mptcp/protocol.h
>>>>>> @@ -737,16 +737,23 @@ static inline bool mptcp_pm_should_rm_signal(struct mptcp_sock *msk)
>>>>>> return READ_ONCE(msk->pm.addr_signal) & BIT(MPTCP_RM_ADDR_SIGNAL);
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -static inline unsigned int mptcp_add_addr_len(int family, bool echo, bool port)
>>>>>> +static inline unsigned int mptcp_add_addr_len(struct mptcp_out_options *opts)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> - u8 len = TCPOLEN_MPTCP_ADD_ADDR_BASE;
>>>>>> + u8 len = 0;
>>>>>> + struct mptcp_addr_info *addr = &opts->remote;
>>>>>
>>>>> We can simplify it like this:
>>>>> struct mptcp_addr_info *addr = opts->ahmac ? &opts->local :
>>>>> &opts->remote;
>>>>>
>>>>> And keep the orignal code unchanged.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - if (family == AF_INET6)
>>>>>> - len = TCPOLEN_MPTCP_ADD_ADDR6_BASE;
>>>>>> - if (!echo)
>>>>>> + if (opts->ahmac) {
>>>>>> + addr = &opts->local;
>>>>>> len += MPTCPOPT_THMAC_LEN;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (addr->family == AF_INET6)
>>>>>> + len += TCPOLEN_MPTCP_ADD_ADDR6_BASE;
>>>>>> + else
>>>>>> + len += TCPOLEN_MPTCP_ADD_ADDR_BASE;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> /* account for 2 trailing 'nop' options */
>>>>>> - if (port)
>>>>>> + if (addr->port)
>>>>>> len += TCPOLEN_MPTCP_PORT_LEN + TCPOLEN_MPTCP_PORT_ALIGN;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> return len;
>>>>>
>>>>> The whole function is something like this:
>>>>> '''
>>>>> struct mptcp_addr_info *addr = opts->ahmac ? &opts->local :
>>>>> &opts->remote;
>>>>> u8 len = TCPOLEN_MPTCP_ADD_ADDR_BASE;
>>>>>
>>>>> if (addr->family == AF_INET6)
>>>>> len = TCPOLEN_MPTCP_ADD_ADDR6_BASE;
>>>>> if (opts->ahmac)
>>>>> len += MPTCPOPT_THMAC_LEN;
>>>>> /* account for 2 trailing 'nop' options */
>>>>> if (addr->port)
>>>>> len += TCPOLEN_MPTCP_PORT_LEN + TCPOLEN_MPTCP_PORT_ALIGN;
>>>>>
>>>>> return len;
>>>>> '''
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>> -Geliang
>>>>>
>>>>>> @@ -760,8 +767,8 @@ static inline int mptcp_rm_addr_len(const struct mptcp_rm_list *rm_list)
>>>>>> return TCPOLEN_MPTCP_RM_ADDR_BASE + roundup(rm_list->nr - 1, 4) + 1;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -bool mptcp_pm_add_addr_signal(struct mptcp_sock *msk, unsigned int remaining,
>>>>>> - struct mptcp_addr_info *saddr, bool *echo, bool *port);
>>>>>> +bool mptcp_pm_add_addr_signal(struct mptcp_sock *msk, struct mptcp_out_options *opts,
>>>>>> + u8 *add_addr);
>>>>>> bool mptcp_pm_rm_addr_signal(struct mptcp_sock *msk, unsigned int remaining,
>>>>>> struct mptcp_rm_list *rm_list);
>>>>>> int mptcp_pm_get_local_id(struct mptcp_sock *msk, struct sock_common *skc);
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> 1.8.3.1
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Li YongLong
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Li YongLong
>>
>
--
Li YongLong
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-30 1:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-29 1:41 [PATCH v6 0/4] mptcp: fix conflicts when using pm.add_signal in ADD_ADDR/echo and RM_ADDR process Yonglong Li
2021-06-29 1:41 ` [PATCH v6 1/4] mptcp: fix ADD_ADDR and RM_ADDR maybe flush addr_signal each other Yonglong Li
2021-06-29 5:43 ` Geliang Tang
2021-06-29 1:41 ` [PATCH v6 2/4] mptcp: make MPTCP_ADD_ADDR_SIGNAL and MPTCP_ADD_ADDR_ECHO separate Yonglong Li
2021-06-29 1:41 ` [PATCH v6 3/4] mptcp: build ADD_ADDR/echo-ADD_ADDR option according pm.add_signal Yonglong Li
2021-06-29 5:58 ` Geliang Tang
2021-06-29 6:05 ` Geliang Tang
2021-06-29 7:01 ` Yonglong Li
2021-06-29 7:35 ` Geliang Tang
2021-06-29 7:54 ` Yonglong Li
2021-06-29 8:25 ` Geliang Tang
2021-06-30 1:30 ` Yonglong Li [this message]
2021-06-30 2:05 ` Geliang Tang
2021-06-30 6:50 ` Yonglong Li
2021-06-29 1:41 ` [PATCH v6 4/4] mptcp: remove MPTCP_ADD_ADDR_IPV6 and MPTCP_ADD_ADDR_PORT Yonglong Li
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=14a8296f-cd3e-dc1d-68fe-b0f0e67930d4@chinatelecom.cn \
--to=liyonglong@chinatelecom.cn \
--cc=geliangtang@gmail.com \
--cc=mathew.j.martineau@linux.intel.com \
--cc=mptcp@lists.linux.dev \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).