From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=23.83.209.151 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1793892772; b=3gJ4W2ukPqKHwn7xWhWH5a13n6mnZCDhlpA4VvFuk+KxC71icADiYupVDDZ1N648N/gn dA9S4bdzzjgDygRg9JIp/WI0Jtp10Lb7yTFkz7RuQ0woY6p6x494tlAWkCS59Jlck+V5c q9h6H6PMHIuqj+Y5VR+U9GSgS8E9qDYqCzgnMvRbCQRmVfwdO+CpdDVH8704HBCn41Ij0 JJIvrHyYNT7kXciSWDUmfxiqufJQalQemi+YSP/qUu8y6FuNNgtFac20wvLStJTlgi06T DTk6Ct47okCl1marCZRFUe26Gx+2pT3QnlAYT4dN9LFnR9Ji3ME+qS/bkneKQdi7riw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1793892772; h=DMARC-Filter:X-Sender-Id:Received:Received:X-Sender-Id:X-MC-Relay: X-MailChannels-SenderId:X-MailChannels-Auth-Id:X-Chemical-Abaft: X-MC-Loop-Signature:X-MC-Ingress-Time:Received:Received: DKIM-Signature:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To:User-Agent; bh=l1y03LKwED8ZduwAbGwCiRWWK0EB6JTtYi+MQr5n6rc=; b=p0X41uAFCdbZ1R2MTdG1nrz2wJxKruBnHxylKGVvrDTDRMGPmDm88stt5tiyZV7nkW9a L2/hkteTzgOQssAxaPQbr5fqbgDho/FxwnDOkvM2P7mZXF9UQhLhjKsaH87z10WAU8wsS e9mBDOPL1LQbs1upgTYJHbqroedSatH2AbF9BsZiRa1rs1ywmJeAbLMPpKiQOUP39gaZo prRwn7nIxvf5+jo4ecuLVNVxC4wEje8rYnX+//NK46p4eRtZ6waegPrrZF8NhOS55tAdE Tz0NoSpDGVJCvYgt8mOMbTG808cSRUIgZRmP3NE9MJNI8mvtge0GGefDshI7EtuHNaw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none header.from=stgolabs.net; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=stgolabs.net; dkim=pass header.d=stgolabs.net header.i=@stgolabs.net header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=dreamhost header.b=qU1oqjtV; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=23.83.209.151 Received: from quail.birch.relay.mailchannels.net (quail.birch.relay.mailchannels.net [23.83.209.151]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7ADF9606EE8A; Thu, 5 Nov 2026 15:32:51 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 smtp.subspace.kernel.org 7ADF9606EE8A Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=stgolabs.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=stgolabs.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=stgolabs.net header.i=@stgolabs.net header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=dreamhost header.b=qU1oqjtV X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|dave@stgolabs.net Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAD1A405ED; Thu, 05 Nov 2026 15:32:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a210.dreamhost.com (trex-green-0.trex.outbound.svc.cluster.local [100.99.188.114]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 03E8640A73; Thu, 05 Nov 2026 15:32:45 +0000 (UTC) X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|dave@stgolabs.net X-MC-Relay: Neutral X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|dave@stgolabs.net X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost X-Chemical-Abaft: 166461fe4d6674fb_1793892765466_11164343 X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1793892765466:1908407538 X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1793892765466 Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a210.dreamhost.com (pop.dreamhost.com [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) by 100.99.188.114 (trex/8.0.2); Thu, 05 Nov 2026 15:32:45 +0000 Received: from offworld (unknown [190.113.127.252]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: dave@stgolabs.net) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a210.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4jL5sl3CQzzWW; Thu, 5 Nov 2026 07:32:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stgolabs.net; s=dreamhost; t=1793892764; bh=l1y03LKwED8ZduwAbGwCiRWWK0EB6JTtYi+MQr5n6rc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Content-Type; b=qU1oqjtV3XWLiUTZXJFfCY9ulHDxB7xdY0SIZP3nP1RKbbUFdRy69KJom6R6Qjh5u lnFl7Dbc9oMG811FQf0m5LW597SYjIykXKaIZ99q7CVoFEjXMSQ+nsP2+7QTca69/q 7PXIvPdvwS/vXU+T6gtHVdVjPRxaYVWmHtHNROKpcuqLotiXYgAOjFAw49OFFFDzlk egPUd6+Kwa2m2P9xNuw6E3XsCpPZVWAr6Lbx8/GiDKoXIS12F+8jnXfXKVw6gADSZH CGSgC6BjLTa9+HOcBJ9eg2ptX3RGQ0aI8GC1nv6Q8DVRikHBuzhTNLkn+BkpdZ0Jpq bzKa+RMO+izjg== Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2026 07:32:39 -0800 From: Davidlohr Bueso To: Simon Horman Cc: jk@codeconstruct.com.au, matt@codeconstruct.com.au, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, anisa.su@samsung.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] mctp: accept MSG_CMSG_COMPAT in recvmsg Message-ID: <20261105153239.qmqroxth43ncnln5@offworld> References: <20261101200331.1956836-1-dave@stgolabs.net> <20261105135808.GS865646@horms.kernel.org> X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20261105135808.GS865646@horms.kernel.org> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20220429 On Thu, 05 Nov 2026, Simon Horman wrote: >On Sun, Nov 01, 2026 at 12:03:31PM -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: >> 32-bit userspace running on a 64-bit kernel is unable to receive MCTP >> messages on an AF_MCTP socket, even though sending succeeds. There is >> nothing for MCTP to do with it beyond not rejecting it, as af_packet, >> af_key and can/isotp already do, for example. > >Hi Davidlohr, > >Thanks for your patch. > >As prompted elsewhere by a bot, it would be good if the patch description >included some information about how this was found. And also to what >extent the fix has been tested. I know you answered that already but >I'm going to ask for a v2 for other reasons. And it would be good >to include that detail there. Thanks for taking a look. So I don't think the changelog should be mentioning random userspace programs for testing/verifying this - as the bot email suggested, just replying there should be enough. > >> >> Fixes: 833ef3b91de6 ("mctp: Populate socket implementation") >> Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso > >This seems to be a fix that effects users. Which I believe you have >reproduced. As such I'd lean towards this being for net, CCed to stable. > >Subject: [PATCH net v2] ... > >Otherwise, it should be for net-next. > >Subject: [PATCH net-next v2] ... Will do. > >> --- >> net/mctp/af_mctp.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/net/mctp/af_mctp.c b/net/mctp/af_mctp.c >> index 8af5e2b3c8d1..aa22c0860712 100644 >> --- a/net/mctp/af_mctp.c >> +++ b/net/mctp/af_mctp.c >> @@ -292,8 +292,7 @@ static int mctp_recvmsg(struct socket *sock, struct msghdr *msg, size_t len, > >Strangely this patch has been mangled - the original code is 7 rather than >8 lines long. (s/,8/,7). Because of this it could not be applied by our >CI which then did not run the usual tests. Yeah I messed that up (noticed sashiko couldn't apply it either), not sure what happened. Thanks, Davidlohr