6.1-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@xxxxxxxxxx>
commit 0a567c2a10033bf04ed618368d179bce6977984b upstream.
Since its introduction, the mentioned MIB accounted for the wrong
event: wake-up being skipped as not-needed on some edge condition
instead of incoming skb being dropped after landing in the (subflow)
receive queue.
Move the increment in the correct location.
Fixes: ce599c516386 ("mptcp: properly account bulk freed memory")
Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Mat Martineau <martineau@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Matthieu Baerts (NGI0) <matttbe@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
net/mptcp/protocol.c | 8 ++++----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
--- a/net/mptcp/protocol.c
+++ b/net/mptcp/protocol.c
@@ -363,8 +363,10 @@ static bool __mptcp_move_skb(struct mptc
skb_orphan(skb);
/* try to fetch required memory from subflow */
- if (!mptcp_rmem_schedule(sk, ssk, skb->truesize))
+ if (!mptcp_rmem_schedule(sk, ssk, skb->truesize)) {
+ MPTCP_INC_STATS(sock_net(sk), MPTCP_MIB_RCVPRUNED);
goto drop;
+ }
has_rxtstamp = TCP_SKB_CB(skb)->has_rxtstamp;
@@ -851,10 +853,8 @@ void mptcp_data_ready(struct sock *sk, s
sk_rbuf = ssk_rbuf;
/* over limit? can't append more skbs to msk, Also, no need to wake-up*/
- if (__mptcp_rmem(sk) > sk_rbuf) {
- MPTCP_INC_STATS(sock_net(sk), MPTCP_MIB_RCVPRUNED);
+ if (__mptcp_rmem(sk) > sk_rbuf)
return;
- }
/* Wake-up the reader only for in-sequence data */
mptcp_data_lock(sk);
