From: Paolo Abeni pabeni@redhat.com
[ Upstream commit f7d6a237d7422809d458d754016de2844017cb4d ]
Since full-mesh endpoint support, the reception of a single ADD_ADDR option can cause multiple subflows creation. When such option is accepted we increment 'add_addr_accepted' by one. When we received a paired RM_ADDR option, we deleted all the relevant subflows, decrementing 'add_addr_accepted' by one for each of them.
We have a similar issue for 'local_addr_used'
Fix them moving the pm endpoint accounting outside the subflow traversal.
Fixes: 1a0d6136c5f0 ("mptcp: local addresses fullmesh") Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni pabeni@redhat.com Signed-off-by: Mat Martineau mathew.j.martineau@linux.intel.com Signed-off-by: David S. Miller davem@davemloft.net Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin sashal@kernel.org --- net/mptcp/pm_netlink.c | 18 ++++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/mptcp/pm_netlink.c b/net/mptcp/pm_netlink.c index b79251a36dcbc..d96860053816a 100644 --- a/net/mptcp/pm_netlink.c +++ b/net/mptcp/pm_netlink.c @@ -710,6 +710,8 @@ static void mptcp_pm_nl_rm_addr_or_subflow(struct mptcp_sock *msk, return;
for (i = 0; i < rm_list->nr; i++) { + bool removed = false; + list_for_each_entry_safe(subflow, tmp, &msk->conn_list, node) { struct sock *ssk = mptcp_subflow_tcp_sock(subflow); int how = RCV_SHUTDOWN | SEND_SHUTDOWN; @@ -729,15 +731,19 @@ static void mptcp_pm_nl_rm_addr_or_subflow(struct mptcp_sock *msk, mptcp_close_ssk(sk, ssk, subflow); spin_lock_bh(&msk->pm.lock);
- if (rm_type == MPTCP_MIB_RMADDR) { - msk->pm.add_addr_accepted--; - WRITE_ONCE(msk->pm.accept_addr, true); - } else if (rm_type == MPTCP_MIB_RMSUBFLOW) { - msk->pm.local_addr_used--; - } + removed = true; msk->pm.subflows--; __MPTCP_INC_STATS(sock_net(sk), rm_type); } + if (!removed) + continue; + + if (rm_type == MPTCP_MIB_RMADDR) { + msk->pm.add_addr_accepted--; + WRITE_ONCE(msk->pm.accept_addr, true); + } else if (rm_type == MPTCP_MIB_RMSUBFLOW) { + msk->pm.local_addr_used--; + } } }