From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8C7C570 for ; Wed, 23 Jun 2021 09:48:06 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1624441685; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=gBTK6nBj2bkaTtCXNCWZeGDygQk0fWijsEVtELI86sc=; b=ghv4ATa9IR+GNEpi+XZvotWh2rguE1WVhYMOfboM1aiCAqUlYLrE7ywoU2SU3UZQEmMozW H86rI2pfObh2vzEr0jtgyaI5y0sMxF0uxjUW1icue/Mt46QGAZUz3w8ht6f33HJ5PYuhe+ FHJdYr81tzfvR/y1i+sWlUZO9ANMpSU= Received: from mail-wm1-f71.google.com (mail-wm1-f71.google.com [209.85.128.71]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-355-HDr9F2WWMpq8AtQ-YYNJkw-1; Wed, 23 Jun 2021 05:48:04 -0400 X-MC-Unique: HDr9F2WWMpq8AtQ-YYNJkw-1 Received: by mail-wm1-f71.google.com with SMTP id v25-20020a1cf7190000b0290197a4be97b7so383408wmh.9 for ; Wed, 23 Jun 2021 02:48:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=gBTK6nBj2bkaTtCXNCWZeGDygQk0fWijsEVtELI86sc=; b=UNQZQBIm3aLgkhfRTHrWu93a6ggR57DlrFa06IZ6hCSIvny9fOvhoRZZj4khitSFgG 3yTpCBHelJxUHXhKT7xm7yw9dchL1TYHiJUEIpU5hY0T+1gSRDqVRU/5trBVRFeKOaB4 A3DzSVpouAqIXlAGDmwbQ5vWLtJvncGqT/yRWqYe5MyTkCxQ0b3G6UDlnl2YThpRUVub 2WpzoGTSb10nOufGWKgPFGeulA/AyxCb2X1wKuf4qBc7GQF32koxM6IkRDuDOHyJR8jR hyCx2a4QRlxNoSPWE7R0c7l2xf19YVTYLev+g0YVWXhVPXfPfNHNQJu91QC/QtbfOIx6 FDrQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531agdj0HQqsU622vSBjvm7xF1UJP/YYh1HSWMqx9vP2fOjsL1A8 mkQIYoMJ9B+uP7UcEPCsM8VWPVv3uU4vrp9u47zctdhdk0EwN/wB4ri/SNf/BS3U0TuoxjB3+MJ PMZHj557/r4xQH9U= X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c006:: with SMTP id c6mr9669556wmb.11.1624441683001; Wed, 23 Jun 2021 02:48:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzE4Cx/CjA8vNp9t8U1kBPAYZ5h9/jXJWt9IfNb125+mNyrh8E1s4mAI8BijxwTLDRMeQECUQ== X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c006:: with SMTP id c6mr9669536wmb.11.1624441682821; Wed, 23 Jun 2021 02:48:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gerbillo.redhat.com (146-241-109-224.dyn.eolo.it. [146.241.109.224]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q7sm2641398wrw.18.2021.06.23.02.48.02 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 23 Jun 2021 02:48:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1ac0561c290bf87aa54277bc6b458a859b8ff080.camel@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] mptcp: avoid processing packet if a subflow reset From: Paolo Abeni To: Mat Martineau , Jianguo Wu Cc: mptcp@lists.linux.dev, fw@strlen.de Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2021 11:48:01 +0200 In-Reply-To: <2024b917-84de-4dea-2244-5dce7a7f2495@linux.intel.com> References: <1623840570-42004-1-git-send-email-wujianguo106@163.com> <1623840570-42004-5-git-send-email-wujianguo106@163.com> <45dcfe4c-1918-2d78-accf-141bb4af2c5b@linux.intel.com> <2024b917-84de-4dea-2244-5dce7a7f2495@linux.intel.com> User-Agent: Evolution 3.36.5 (3.36.5-2.fc32) X-Mailing-List: mptcp@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=pabeni@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 2021-06-22 at 17:00 -0700, Mat Martineau wrote: > On Mon, 21 Jun 2021, Jianguo Wu wrote: > > > Hi Mat, > > > > On 2021/6/19 8:19, Mat Martineau wrote: > > > On Wed, 16 Jun 2021, wujianguo106@163.com wrote: > > > > > > > From: Jianguo Wu > > > > > > > > If check_fully_established() causes a subflow reset, it should not > > > > continue to process the packet in tcp_data_queue(). > > > > > > > > setting: > > > > TCP_SKB_CB(skb)->end_seq = TCP_SKB_CB(skb)->seq; > > > > > > > > so that the following check will drop the pkt in > > > > tcp_data_queue(): > > > > if (TCP_SKB_CB(skb)->seq == TCP_SKB_CB(skb)->end_seq) { > > > > __kfree_skb(skb); > > > > return; > > > > } > > > > > > > > Fixes: d582484726c4 ("mptcp: fix fallback for MP_JOIN subflows") > > > > Signed-off-by: Jianguo Wu > > > > --- > > > > net/mptcp/options.c | 6 ++++++ > > > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/net/mptcp/options.c b/net/mptcp/options.c > > > > index 1aec01686c1a..be435c5421cd 100644 > > > > --- a/net/mptcp/options.c > > > > +++ b/net/mptcp/options.c > > > > @@ -926,6 +926,12 @@ static bool check_fully_established(struct mptcp_sock *msk, struct sock *ssk, > > > > return true; > > > > > > > > reset: > > > > + /* If a subflow is reset, the packet should not continue to be > > > > + * processed in tcp_data_queue(), so setting: end_seq = seq, > > > > + * then tcp_data_queue() will drop the packet. > > > > + */ > > > > + TCP_SKB_CB(skb)->end_seq = TCP_SKB_CB(skb)->seq; > > > > + > > > > > > This does have the desired effect when mptcp_incoming_options() is > > > called from tcp_data_queue(), but mptcp_incoming_options() is also > > > called from tcp_reset() and tcp_rcv_state_process(). The other callers > > > appear to tolerate the sequence number modification. > > > > > > I think it would be clearer to either add a return value or output > > > parameter to mptcp_incoming_options() to explicitly tell the caller > > > that a reset has been sent and tcp_done() called. Then it would be > > > clearer in tcp_data_queue() that the packet is being discarded due to > > > mptcp header content. > > > > > > > If a reset has been sent and tcp_done() called in > > check_fully_established(), the sk_state will be TCP_CLOSE, how about > > just do (sk_state == TCP_CLOSE) check in tcp_data_queue() as it did in > > the V1 of this patch? > > Oh, I see now that Paolo suggested the the end_seq assignment in order to > only modify MPTCP code. > > I still think it's better to make it clear that we're discarding a packet > due to the mptcp headers - using the existing sequence check (intended to > detect acks) in tcp_data_queue() seems sneaky to me. > > Something like > > if (sk_is_mptcp(sk) && !mptcp_incoming_options(sk, skb)) { > __kfree_skb(skb); > return; > } > > seems both compact and clear. Does that seem ok Paolo? Uhmmm... we need to touch every mptcp_incoming_options() call site, and in tcp_reset() the above chunk looks a bit strange to me. Probably we could just ignore the mptcp_incoming_options() return value there. Otherwise no big objections - not sure about upstream ;) Cheers, Paolo