From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 969C01B2194; Wed, 19 Mar 2025 15:38:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1742398716; cv=none; b=EjpOdSHTUhLNgQKx8pqxAWqQJJNYTl5wBoV8t7lWeRQAhNhDfmUpgTjd/ubZuktu7m5LKzOXAwao+SftqWG+rbQEtMqGi7oa1V1Jp0Pk+BPuBhCQ/Flx4mAyUpCgR+qPDQhgUToGyz67asYx38LZmmsl/QUQ1Wn53EM88TSucu8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1742398716; c=relaxed/simple; bh=as2ZkZvOluIbSg38wCPRNZQ5xEj8hkiuVt3mJbCXsao=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=MGNhc3yPtabS5WObf3lmMZF6FWbZtNkTRhF9PozBIcXKTSIEVvey00hJ/J+0olu1UoQImTxQVsyO2UUjk8W19B2rEcz3MFmSs0IJd6ABeLcMhJMmyI1/HId+uXlyAt0FX2mICsKh25Ii7al31PljsuY9QsiNnItKyZweffX21N4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=R5LHvrIL; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="R5LHvrIL" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 804DBC4CEE4; Wed, 19 Mar 2025 15:38:31 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1742398715; bh=as2ZkZvOluIbSg38wCPRNZQ5xEj8hkiuVt3mJbCXsao=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=R5LHvrILkseNYAW1bWJ3owkyzvyT6NLQiaLDNWIkbrqR6hN+AVvYSdkk4jwoy2rEk 46aa1PmG5X/nc1ZhUY81ejmMB38aQjGNkun9p/M67+Ou6R/BRQHbLZ/UfJwaizhPdf MA6/e0wjMZSG657f97PgzPuFCSmeGTXiU/tpYE9cm8SWJZ63EYdPvmqyOj26hRfqbp Ym1XmHLAN9d24mKPQz95IIfCFsQvU0ddpkbPBgmhGHOiAUrGk2xmsoTa76BpZ1yWL1 F0f20lXIp9kp/qKUgGCcUVYBYOiBgM5xEUc3O+CtaMI2x/vkCFiZbRdBOpJn+2qGoq CjscnfQoUZb7w== Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 15:38:27 +0000 From: Simon Horman To: "Matthieu Baerts (NGI0)" Cc: mptcp@lists.linux.dev, Mat Martineau , Geliang Tang , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , Florian Westphal , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/3] mptcp: sockopt: fix getting IPV6_V6ONLY Message-ID: <20250319153827.GC768132@kernel.org> References: <20250314-net-mptcp-fix-data-stream-corr-sockopt-v1-0-122dbb249db3@kernel.org> <20250314-net-mptcp-fix-data-stream-corr-sockopt-v1-2-122dbb249db3@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250314-net-mptcp-fix-data-stream-corr-sockopt-v1-2-122dbb249db3@kernel.org> On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 09:11:32PM +0100, Matthieu Baerts (NGI0) wrote: > When adding a socket option support in MPTCP, both the get and set parts > are supposed to be implemented. > > IPV6_V6ONLY support for the setsockopt part has been added a while ago, > but it looks like the get part got forgotten. It should have been > present as a way to verify a setting has been set as expected, and not > to act differently from TCP or any other socket types. > > Not supporting this getsockopt(IPV6_V6ONLY) blocks some apps which want > to check the default value, before doing extra actions. On Linux, the > default value is 0, but this can be changed with the net.ipv6.bindv6only > sysctl knob. On Windows, it is set to 1 by default. So supporting the > get part, like for all other socket options, is important. > > Everything was in place to expose it, just the last step was missing. > Only new code is added to cover this specific getsockopt(), that seems > safe. > > Fixes: c9b95a135987 ("mptcp: support IPV6_V6ONLY setsockopt") > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > Closes: https://github.com/multipath-tcp/mptcp_net-next/issues/550 > Reviewed-by: Mat Martineau > Signed-off-by: Matthieu Baerts (NGI0) Hi Matthieu, all, TBH, I would lean towards this being net-next material rather than a fix for net. But that notwithstanding this looks good to me. Reviewed-by: Simon Horman