From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B51422D8767; Thu, 30 Jul 2026 00:23:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1785370989; cv=none; b=Wtp3bOgzPdSIn1NsxL+W6DKHzRs27RO3mNYb1oxyvEGMWCmx68KdODEjmI9ri6M2obSLEjJUWB8cBZhv/5ponEHOEi5oYy/EsD8mobQwg/eum0bUmO4eg+AcGPhKyHpmtd1ZIrCxgtgUpRyOsb8ejpGfme6WCxJQ1ib9/9Akin8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1785370989; c=relaxed/simple; bh=P1YiPg4t92Fgdvv53R2b61R1zeguosUqvGGmuDmEjII=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=IsoCaFzRTnRkpCTbWOSAhYbr/dTnuPY40mVbHf5IrzejCbYFLCJM0hW0pkXcbqGTm7EZe1WtpOyzF15vIlU9YEaOC5usTl7Esa3x1cZGj+hFVP1l+JdGLOmoE2vhLvMiQpflcrICUmHQIu6m0+9ykMp7PgFJ0vMNLdHbd3zPmN0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=ZNUDxnyW; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="ZNUDxnyW" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B910B1F000E9; Thu, 30 Jul 2026 00:23:06 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1785370987; bh=P1YiPg4t92Fgdvv53R2b61R1zeguosUqvGGmuDmEjII=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=ZNUDxnyW7gsS6HCsr6lr7vyN9LUVKuOQQT0JfW4i5VztKSUi2fkf96UQb6KVJlSzE rlVDuluYmgtPhRPdPbw8juw0rWZwpAyPGHHxHQ5UYcZmnr2AIeNWIrM3oPXbaoiv71 33+JJ9QejpzLqnQARHlqzq8MlrocQvukPIo16NQ66A0+Vrf5I1RXhvUJxRp9VDmZZC QWkidKfYhuRUB8sV9ze2NQ2ZCP/CuEFKl9IUweuTBqjSC/jRzHJs6qhP3vxc2CA42D heoL0myquTx2SEURnmbrf9WtbnjSh33+Jdp2ILZFxUobILzoBq/EzGYPa+fHZKHkYJ sR3vPtJF2iF0w== Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 17:23:06 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski To: "Matthieu Baerts (NGI0)" Cc: Mat Martineau , Geliang Tang , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Paolo Abeni , Simon Horman , netdev@vger.kernel.org, mptcp@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, Florian Westphal , Davide Caratti , Christoph Paasch Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/5] mptcp: avoid combining some incoming suboptions Message-ID: <20260729172306.31deb67d@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20260728-net-mptcp-misc-fixes-7-2-rc6-v1-1-f7e2d229159d@kernel.org> References: <20260728-net-mptcp-misc-fixes-7-2-rc6-v1-0-f7e2d229159d@kernel.org> <20260728-net-mptcp-misc-fixes-7-2-rc6-v1-1-f7e2d229159d@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 28 Jul 2026 19:11:57 +0200 Matthieu Baerts (NGI0) wrote: > Some MPTCP suboptions are mutually exclusive according to the RFC8684, > but also because in different places, the code doesn't expect some > combinations to be present. That's specially true for suboptions that > would be present twice, but with different attributes. Looks like Clashiko has much to say about this patch. Could you check? =46rom my perspective I'm not sure if such RFC compliance changes really belong as Fixes? I don't feel too strongly tho.