From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
Cc: mptcp@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: Patch "mptcp: annotate data-races around subflow->fully_established" has been added to the 6.12-stable tree
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2026 07:48:55 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260920074855.D7DFF1F000FF@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2026092037-islamic-default-0aca@gregkh>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] mptcp: build failure due to READ_ONCE() on bit-field
--
commit 2cede4d0675228e6db5b209f56d2a298cf7cb2e9
Author: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Patch "mptcp: annotate data-races around subflow->fully_established" has been added to the 6.12-stable tree
This commit annotates data races around the fully_established flag in the
mptcp subflow context. It aims to convert the flag from a bit-field to a
boolean type to safely use READ_ONCE() and WRITE_ONCE().
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20241021-net-next-mptcp-misc-6-13-v1-2-1ef02746504a@kernel.org
> Additionally, we make a crucial change: convert the subflow's
> 'fully_established' from 'bit_field' to 'bool' type. This is
> necessary because methods for avoiding data races don't work well
> with 'bit_field'. Specifically, the 'READ_ONCE' needs to know
> the size of the variable being accessed, which is not supported in
> 'bit_field'. Also, 'test_bit' expect the address of 'bit_field'.
[Severity: Low]
Was the hunk converting this field to a boolean dropped during the backport?
It appears fully_established is still defined as a bit-field in
struct mptcp_subflow_context.
Additionally, the write side update was missed in the backport:
net/mptcp/subflow.c:__mptcp_subflow_fully_established() {
...
subflow->fully_established = 1;
...
}
This lacks the WRITE_ONCE() annotation and continues to perform an unsafe
read-modify-write on the shared bit-field word.
> diff --git a/net/mptcp/options.c b/net/mptcp/options.c
> index 370c3836b7712..1603b3702e220 100644
> --- a/net/mptcp/options.c
> +++ b/net/mptcp/options.c
> @@ -461,7 +461,7 @@ static bool mptcp_established_options_mp(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb,
> return false;
>
> /* MPC/MPJ needed only on 3rd ack packet, DATA_FIN and TCP shutdown take precedence */
> - if (subflow->fully_established || snd_data_fin_enable ||
> + if (READ_ONCE(subflow->fully_established) || snd_data_fin_enable ||
[Severity: Low]
Does this trigger a compiler error? Since the struct modification was missed
and fully_established remains a bit-field, applying READ_ONCE() here attempts
to take the address of a bit-field, which is syntactically invalid in C.
[ ... ]
> diff --git a/net/mptcp/protocol.h b/net/mptcp/protocol.h
> index 568a72702b080..e9dba0708ee70 100644
> --- a/net/mptcp/protocol.h
> +++ b/net/mptcp/protocol.h
> @@ -532,7 +532,7 @@ struct mptcp_subflow_context {
> is_mptfo : 1, /* subflow is doing TFO */
> close_event_done : 1, /* has done the post-closed part */
> mpc_drop : 1, /* the MPC option has been dropped in a rtx */
> - __unused : 8;
> + __unused : 9;
[Severity: Low]
Does this increase the total bit-field group to 33 bits, causing a boundary
overflow?
Since fully_established wasn't actually removed from the bit-field group in
this backport, incrementing the unused bits to 9 pushes the total beyond a
32-bit word size.
> bool data_avail;
> bool scheduled;
> bool pm_listener; /* a listener managed by the kernel PM? */
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/2026092037-islamic-default-0aca@gregkh?part=1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-20 7:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-19 19:56 [PATCH 6.12.y 0/5] mptcp: fix recent failed backports (20260919) Matthieu Baerts (NGI0)
2026-09-19 19:56 ` [PATCH 6.12.y 1/5] mptcp: annotate data-races around subflow->fully_established Matthieu Baerts (NGI0)
2026-09-20 7:36 ` Patch "mptcp: annotate data-races around subflow->fully_established" has been added to the 6.12-stable tree gregkh
2026-09-20 7:48 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-09-20 9:33 ` Matthieu Baerts
2026-09-20 13:10 ` Greg KH
2026-09-20 13:23 ` Matthieu Baerts
2026-09-19 19:56 ` [PATCH 6.12.y 2/5] mptcp: remove unneeded READ_ONCE() annotation Matthieu Baerts (NGI0)
2026-09-19 19:56 ` [PATCH 6.12.y 3/5] mptcp: avoid unneeded actions on subflow reset Matthieu Baerts (NGI0)
2026-09-20 7:36 ` Patch "mptcp: avoid unneeded actions on subflow reset" has been added to the 6.12-stable tree gregkh
2026-09-19 19:56 ` [PATCH 6.12.y 4/5] mptcp: close race between scheduler and state change Matthieu Baerts (NGI0)
2026-09-20 7:36 ` Patch "mptcp: close race between scheduler and state change" has been added to the 6.12-stable tree gregkh
2026-09-19 19:56 ` [PATCH 6.12.y 5/5] mptcp: fix bad accounting in __mptcp_subflow_push_pending() Matthieu Baerts (NGI0)
2026-09-20 7:36 ` Patch "mptcp: fix bad accounting in __mptcp_subflow_push_pending()" has been added to the 6.12-stable tree gregkh
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260920074855.D7DFF1F000FF@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=mptcp@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.