6.10-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Matthieu Baerts (NGI0) <matttbe@xxxxxxxxxx>
commit 8af1f11865f259c882cce71d32f85ee9004e2660 upstream.
As mentioned in the 'Fixes' commit, the port flag is only supported by
the 'signal' flag, and not by the 'subflow' one. Then if both the
'signal' and 'subflow' flags are set, the problem is the same: the
feature cannot work with the 'subflow' flag.
Technically, if both the 'signal' and 'subflow' flags are set, it will
be possible to create the listening socket, but not to establish a
subflow using this source port. So better to explicitly deny it, not to
create some confusions because the expected behaviour is not possible.
Fixes: 09f12c3ab7a5 ("mptcp: allow to use port and non-signal in set_flags")
Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Reviewed-by: Mat Martineau <martineau@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Matthieu Baerts (NGI0) <matttbe@xxxxxxxxxx>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20240731-upstream-net-20240731-mptcp-endp-subflow-signal-v1-2-c8a9b036493b@xxxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
net/mptcp/pm_netlink.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--- a/net/mptcp/pm_netlink.c
+++ b/net/mptcp/pm_netlink.c
@@ -1328,8 +1328,8 @@ int mptcp_pm_nl_add_addr_doit(struct sk_
if (ret < 0)
return ret;
- if (addr.addr.port && !(addr.flags & MPTCP_PM_ADDR_FLAG_SIGNAL)) {
- GENL_SET_ERR_MSG(info, "flags must have signal when using port");
+ if (addr.addr.port && !address_use_port(&addr)) {
+ GENL_SET_ERR_MSG(info, "flags must have signal and not subflow when using port");
return -EINVAL;
}
