From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-ej1-f47.google.com (mail-ej1-f47.google.com [209.85.218.47]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 665FB7C for ; Wed, 25 May 2022 10:32:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ej1-f47.google.com with SMTP id y13so40038680eje.2 for ; Wed, 25 May 2022 03:32:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tessares-net.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject:content-language:to :cc:references:from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=pdJRdc/ChWME/KxDvyR3ZmETgfGtqY1xnlD8l9hYebU=; b=PXpN/dttRaV6ZjRj3+8fM5fKOugMRbKVV77YrS82pZiguRVn/eRCelxJ0wNCcUm51g SBxGCUBNIXvf3f2bbAK2WY6hWO04JBntvKRC+yS31yDGZfajdTFIofOqKGJtKhra+iLP 7/nyDujb5uxiX6Z07t+uIGhpU7xOtm2mgWl29ciH0qJkVTIwa6Sen+pKWb/c96RQq2mb s60fT+z+Xcq+FG38TOT14eteHndjAaYiTWDZyXQBDAY0hVnTLM2AWOOyfUCdxqOsXZhc KPQraD+QxDcJBYDtkfqaGfiBCPmJrHSQ7xbfo0koI5sahBx3V/SUJW1vdaVIe8OhkDd9 J59Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=pdJRdc/ChWME/KxDvyR3ZmETgfGtqY1xnlD8l9hYebU=; b=XeIu7hcFszAE+qOMSsMcmGu6wKPCq29ZZ2w8cyB9B/NlhTSI/6+Aj85crdqBA/dEqa qV8bcZDFaNH/JnkS/pHddh1o5pyIHhXomsUlK1p2GcQPDEf0nF7QDNa9R2SsdIIQRhGM bf3vRikP1UDAz/5SS4fk9AWkhxGixT6NF33t/ivO9hshmaQjeOzWZ/SNi/vnLFu4kH2W 8/vL5wXl0Pfg/ZWmUgVvBqXxcl3BQTD7az/uWBihKakrlpVVJ4iV4a5+S69Vg04KgIQn OyuFKH2ZadPY84eD1UwJz3hHEcB9UcvMSGBo/yAnL7CsEl7qKhwQNl3DvSFkLjx/sB8+ Krng== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530+/sQro+oTllj4A5YlU3HwT+K9YhlqxQEw/EwQjSPyTzealETV 3p/1EFHx5dT/rsGisq3zXiwToA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwECrSLZmjwGo9irIirPePkFqH5rQ8m6RjYax9+026IapisC7bInKFA7hWtTAvX8i1QY7l8TA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:52c7:b0:6ce:a880:50a3 with SMTP id w7-20020a17090652c700b006cea88050a3mr27925698ejn.437.1653474725390; Wed, 25 May 2022 03:32:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPV6:2a02:578:8593:1200:2c21:b442:2fc3:f06f? ([2a02:578:8593:1200:2c21:b442:2fc3:f06f]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y7-20020a1709060a8700b006fec3b2e4f3sm4073996ejf.205.2022.05.25.03.32.04 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 25 May 2022 03:32:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <0648dc99-7465-871c-90a1-8a69f60d893c@tessares.net> Date: Wed, 25 May 2022 12:32:04 +0200 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: mptcp@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] mptcp: Do TCP fallback on early DSS checksum failure Content-Language: en-GB To: Greg KH , Mat Martineau Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, sashal@kernel.org, Paolo Abeni , "David S . Miller" , MPTCP Upstream References: <20220524181041.19543-1-mathew.j.martineau@linux.intel.com> From: Matthieu Baerts In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Greg, Mat, On 25/05/2022 09:51, Greg KH wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2022 at 11:10:41AM -0700, Mat Martineau wrote: >> [ Upstream commit ae66fb2ba6c3dcaf8b9612b65aa949a1a4bed150 ] >> >> RFC 8684 section 3.7 describes several opportunities for a MPTCP >> connection to "fall back" to regular TCP early in the connection >> process, before it has been confirmed that MPTCP options can be >> successfully propagated on all SYN, SYN/ACK, and data packets. If a peer >> acknowledges the first received data packet with a regular TCP header >> (no MPTCP options), fallback is allowed. >> >> If the recipient of that first data packet finds a MPTCP DSS checksum >> error, this provides an opportunity to fail gracefully with a TCP >> fallback rather than resetting the connection (as might happen if a >> checksum failure were detected later). >> >> This commit modifies the checksum failure code to attempt fallback on >> the initial subflow of a MPTCP connection, only if it's a failure in the >> first data mapping. In cases where the peer initiates the connection, >> requests checksums, is the first to send data, and the peer is sending >> incorrect checksums (see >> https://github.com/multipath-tcp/mptcp_net-next/issues/275), this allows >> the connection to proceed as TCP rather than reset. >> >> Cc: # 5.17.x >> Cc: # 5.15.x >> Fixes: dd8bcd1768ff ("mptcp: validate the data checksum") >> Acked-by: Paolo Abeni >> Signed-off-by: Mat Martineau >> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller >> [mathew.j.martineau: backport: Resolved bitfield conflict in protocol.h] >> Signed-off-by: Mat Martineau >> --- >> >> This patch is already in 5.17.10-rc1 and 5.15.42-rc1, but involves a >> context dependency on upstream commit 4cf86ae84c71 which I have >> requested to be dropped from the stable queues. >> >> I'm posting this backport without the protocol.h conflict to >> (hopefully?) make it easier for the stable maintainers to drop >> 4cf86ae84c71. >> >> For context see https://lore.kernel.org/stable/fa953ec-288f-7715-c6fb-47a222e85270@linux.intel.com/ > > THanks, will take this after this round of releases. It might already be too late but is it possible to have this patch ("mptcp: Do TCP fallback on early DSS checksum failure") and "mptcp: fix checksum byte order" in the same stable release? Note that "mptcp: fix checksum byte order" patch has been recently queued by Sasha at the same time as "mptcp: Do TCP fallback on early DSS checksum failure". A bit of context: "mptcp: fix checksum byte order" fixes an important encoding issue but it also breaks the interoperability with previous Linux versions not having this patch. The patch from Mat ("mptcp: Do TCP fallback on early DSS checksum failure") improves the situation when there is this interoperability issue with a previous Linux versions not implementing the RFC properly. The improvement is there to make the MPTCP connections falling back to TCP instead of resetting them: at least there is a connection. In other words, that would be really nice to have these two commits backported together. If it is easier, it looks best to me to delay the main fix ("mptcp: fix checksum byte order") than having the two patches in different stable versions. But I understand it was not clear and maybe too late to do these modifications. Anyway, thank you for your work maintaining these stable versions! :) Cheers, Matt -- Tessares | Belgium | Hybrid Access Solutions www.tessares.net