mptcp: Stable backports for v6.1

[PATCH 6.1 0/2] mptcp: Stable backports for v6.1

Posted by Matthieu Baerts 1 year, 1 month ago

Hi Greg, Sasha,

Recently, 3 patches related to MPTCP have not been backported due to
conflicts:

 - 3a236aef280e ("mptcp: refactor passive socket initialization")
 - b6985b9b8295 ("mptcp: use the workqueue to destroy unaccepted sockets")
 - 0a3f4f1f9c27 ("mptcp: fix UaF in listener shutdown")

Yesterday, Sasha has resolved the conflicts for the first one and he has
already added this one to v6.1.

In fact, this first patch is a requirement for the two others.

I then here resolved the conflicts for the two other patches, documented
that in each patch and ran our tests suite. Everything seems OK.

Do you mind adding these two patches to v6.1 queue as well if you don't
mind?

Signed-off-by: Matthieu Baerts <matthieu.baerts@tessares.net>
---
Paolo Abeni (2):
      mptcp: use the workqueue to destroy unaccepted sockets
      mptcp: fix UaF in listener shutdown

 net/mptcp/protocol.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++---------
 net/mptcp/protocol.h |  6 ++--
 net/mptcp/subflow.c  | 89 +++++++---------------------------------------------
 3 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 94 deletions(-)
---
base-commit: 0866b93e23cb1d66eb4b105d305cdb185ca17b7d
change-id: 20230323-upstream-stable-conflicts-6-1-e0baa081983d

Best regards,
-- 
Matthieu Baerts <matthieu.baerts@tessares.net>

Re: [PATCH 6.1 0/2] mptcp: Stable backports for v6.1

Posted by Sasha Levin 1 year, 1 month ago

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 06:49:00PM +0100, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
>Hi Greg, Sasha,
>
>Recently, 3 patches related to MPTCP have not been backported due to
>conflicts:
>
> - 3a236aef280e ("mptcp: refactor passive socket initialization")
> - b6985b9b8295 ("mptcp: use the workqueue to destroy unaccepted sockets")
> - 0a3f4f1f9c27 ("mptcp: fix UaF in listener shutdown")
>
>Yesterday, Sasha has resolved the conflicts for the first one and he has
>already added this one to v6.1.
>
>In fact, this first patch is a requirement for the two others.
>
>I then here resolved the conflicts for the two other patches, documented
>that in each patch and ran our tests suite. Everything seems OK.
>
>Do you mind adding these two patches to v6.1 queue as well if you don't
>mind?

Queued up, thanks!

-- 
Thanks,
Sasha