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 621913B27C2; Wed, 27 May 2026 19:49:22 +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=1779911363; cv=none; b=uc187ijm/H3R/UoXtZd0kyMv//a9p4VCehEB3J6HuoPXSAkeQ6QQt6IKFSPA7qZ+fqCrm4Xo8x5V2BFs0IuiQUJi22oN87opQ0j3Td3vnw503r3bfjX13YPWvvwc4Qq9i3fqPe4RvVzOYlEprJzlg0bxYzPO3xpz9jV30gEiRMU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1779911363; c=relaxed/simple; bh=1GFfPNR5K34gDyccJH/hSIhUrEjCFbGPHELgs2rqU44=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=HmGVE4VKx239ltTGqsrpy7vQQaxeat2/n8wybfRPmhZt3EcHu10bE6vBhx7BpV2JEW5wsT9q2pk91Kv0287vPBwVyRv8SKmYPLHOMXYE1YR/vocDCJtVMafhWQUuTF4TSrSdZp65osGoXG6HJXWaIvoM/2c6e2mQ+LsR6lciYws= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=ci8UlVH0; 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="ci8UlVH0" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BF1BE1F00A3D; Wed, 27 May 2026 19:49:20 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1779911362; bh=1GFfPNR5K34gDyccJH/hSIhUrEjCFbGPHELgs2rqU44=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=ci8UlVH0D8ctwOmqPf9iErVsJtcmpmp2+xkGub1np0wYMb1DvtNluZl3+XMNix82E 29FBzqixqwdpGleXJLfCNHnQREZUJSVtPTYRn1WmNBBOjXQ3LLTt4u/vpvdqOGeWCy jJbuJMV7oBijpBXro2k9aEEmvrgJXmveTivEjuJEApht6nxP1WXD54IJS1X3wu80I/ I46tcEUqSbf8Z1UniY9LB0bJwpFdgW4++PwT7wNPmvfWIgVf+EcxVLntdlo9QcTh3w bJabMt7Kieu2bLiGTsk2JcIXsXQ+1q8t4wLXbrR0tI2o3jU5BnTOf9JuRpo+GDkJoZ Bhm1IDtKo2eGA== From: Sasha Levin To: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, Wentao Guan Cc: Sasha Levin , bird@lzu.edu.cn, kuba@kernel.org, kuniyu@google.com, n05ec@lzu.edu.cn, patches@lists.linux.dev, stable@kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, tomapufckgml@gmail.com, wangjiexun2025@gmail.com, yifanwucs@gmail.com, yuantan098@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.6 229/474] af_unix: Reject SIOCATMARK on non-stream sockets Date: Wed, 27 May 2026 15:49:00 -0400 Message-ID: <20260527-agent5-item007-afunix@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.53.0 In-Reply-To: <20260527094544.2344825-1-guanwentao@uniontech.com> References: <20260515154719.961677988@linuxfoundation.org> <20260527094544.2344825-1-guanwentao@uniontech.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > On patch review, found this patch which backport to 6.6 context seems such > different than orginal patch, I think this should be revert: > commit 0d7e7235bc543c6ed7b873e3015db814d8e8c414 > ("af_unix: Reject SIOCATMARK on non-stream sockets"). > pls review. > > [DIFFERENT]: > original patch patched in unix_ioctl(), > this patch in 6.6 patched in unix_stream_read_generic(). Good catch, thanks. Reverted on pending-6.6. No corrected backport is needed on 6.6: the upstream fix d119775f2bad targets the SIOCATMARK path in unix_ioctl(), and the prerequisite that introduces unix_ioctl()'s SIOCATMARK handling (314001f0bf92 "af_unix: Add OOB support") is not present on 6.6. With 0d7e7235bc54 reverted, 6.6 is back in the correct state. -- Thanks, Sasha