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 E66FA168 for ; Fri, 25 Jun 2021 10:45:39 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1624617938; 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=D1NZt1o0Kl/e3aGWrGu2lfxohypq50dhZZ5lC3t9u1U=; b=LaeKlc3VFXiO6ARasjuKo/g/Z1+GilKeGPTHdI+sAFYvdfTECcH497ZL4KAR4GTfCPjHtz ZkZUMtOGOCCMn2hKkPcnGy+lP84EnUrAMsiqM1GprtLDllhDwRYApu5RlPhaCh8soSHzcV iY/69JToZ4ZrrCsDWuWNax/zW7Kv4U8= Received: from mail-wr1-f69.google.com (mail-wr1-f69.google.com [209.85.221.69]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-525-BrXyVxKzNISmudqLwoOaVA-1; Fri, 25 Jun 2021 06:45:37 -0400 X-MC-Unique: BrXyVxKzNISmudqLwoOaVA-1 Received: by mail-wr1-f69.google.com with SMTP id g8-20020a5d54080000b0290124a2d22ff8so2770724wrv.4 for ; Fri, 25 Jun 2021 03:45:37 -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=D1NZt1o0Kl/e3aGWrGu2lfxohypq50dhZZ5lC3t9u1U=; b=LMBTM8dRTVrQo/1HXkH6TEUfSX4vnptWVCUs6wGgrrf79DvEWFZhBWPkf3H3Dh0xFM ebzLc/usWjBMJpYcKlvWK9tyxuz/BYrmpIbPuw4ABzSz6wKR2qSDA3r4YqfIXKIiSCZT JOkx9a71Gq3E2inPx6l2Zb+aokFi++XRsY6RKp5ZdNC0wfLHuEvQvsMwqF8Khy8fsv5o HJWm5G2KYdIf/QpHXfDO7jUDx8z/DRcNhiTga0uY0kj6naYdt3vl2essMC5ZJeLNiPgy bBoDwCMJOU9eMFObAaGars7cns9QKgWGh/DUygXK+X5dOHiFrvzZUbEmNp0iTtVoHP5W YyYg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531/On3T7invEh79fctotMs5nf6ymMLB0ld3ZS5lU+1iFHjyQlFi +p1NCLMbtEqnNVn9sSNogNr5x4nQj7wYq3oz70MqUbpmYOpCK0iEdjdurcoU9TZaPLS9wr6A0Jd OoH+/ACcfZyHTwVQ= X-Received: by 2002:adf:d4ca:: with SMTP id w10mr10184459wrk.197.1624617936368; Fri, 25 Jun 2021 03:45:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxxkEmA//0jlRWurLq8cpvrj5IFq5U8t+GO/grriiFl7OoG6bLvNoEcHonpXfTUTlY+xVNpwg== X-Received: by 2002:adf:d4ca:: with SMTP id w10mr10184440wrk.197.1624617936160; Fri, 25 Jun 2021 03:45:36 -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 g15sm5566243wri.75.2021.06.25.03.45.35 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 25 Jun 2021 03:45:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <9d8a2d8ae7930e741f5441a36ef19d8039731a02.camel@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH mptcp-net v7 4/5] mptcp: avoid processing packet if a subflow reset From: Paolo Abeni To: wujianguo106@163.com, mptcp@lists.linux.dev Cc: mathew.j.martineau@linux.intel.com Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2021 12:45:35 +0200 In-Reply-To: <1624609559-6786-5-git-send-email-wujianguo106@163.com> References: <1624609559-6786-1-git-send-email-wujianguo106@163.com> <1624609559-6786-5-git-send-email-wujianguo106@163.com> User-Agent: Evolution 3.36.5 (3.36.5-2.fc32) Precedence: bulk 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 Hi, I'm sorry for the partial feedback in my previous reply. On Fri, 2021-06-25 at 16:25 +0800, wujianguo106@163.com wrote: > @@ -856,7 +856,8 @@ bool mptcp_synack_options(const struct request_sock *req, unsigned int *size, > static bool check_fully_established(struct mptcp_sock *msk, struct sock *ssk, > struct mptcp_subflow_context *subflow, > struct sk_buff *skb, > - struct mptcp_options_received *mp_opt) > + struct mptcp_options_received *mp_opt, > + bool *subflow_is_rst) This additional argument is not needed... [...] > @@ -1053,12 +1057,12 @@ void mptcp_incoming_options(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb) > __mptcp_check_push(subflow->conn, sk); > __mptcp_data_acked(subflow->conn); > mptcp_data_unlock(subflow->conn); > - return; > + return 1; > } > > mptcp_get_options(sk, skb, &mp_opt); > - if (!check_fully_established(msk, sk, subflow, skb, &mp_opt)) > - return; > + if (!check_fully_established(msk, sk, subflow, skb, &mp_opt, &subflow_is_rst)) > + return subflow_is_rst ? 0 : 1; ... here you can simply: return sk->sk_state != TCP_CLOSE; plus some comment above alike: """the subflow can be in close state only if check_fully_established() just sent a reset. If so, tell the caller to ignore the current packet""" /P