From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=209.85.210.199 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1794038906; b=Z8lwXlHIEir5pSTnQJRtNFN69wPZ6Jw11uf6PrY6ES/0/PMeMLb1FTBJK/03G6Qewiwe SYFJURTZEszzz312h7x12m5IufS/PNY7pCt0GkawdW64oFrhfRVusE9cksNSmoIB3qg7r 3WEqKuYPGGSSQIUwLuHtOfwB7F4oD6wr9RFqAqX8nGdXo+eTwMcEXuttBCJECoLYV7p7P rkoLJ0CJxmnpi+KoeE8hvCB8wwmbeJs+z+Mq1SkPqlale/UH6INR72Ebosf6BmtNaYTGA 7JnuyB1ZIigwMY7/fibIsRBailPycW2R1lS/po4zPGnTf/xeUmNvPFItpgSsrkvke4w== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1794038906; h=DMARC-Filter:Received:DKIM-Signature:X-Google-DKIM-Signature: X-Forwarded-Encrypted:X-Gm-Message-State:X-Received:Date:In-Reply-To: Mime-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Content-Type; bh=ezL4r4ua1RBFqrJXqddrPEFW/yvPOGvhTPdO31bBmUg=; b=tCIL7AnT6bSBNrx5peA3ZKxfAF4bPzk4VcKYmizI17N2UxDK2oMH1n3i2L/5Ttm16CwH L7XCDSC4pfS/UnceLBYKA/CKptYiBXJb3E9bIydF+JATvHgCe2a+T6fnwoof5tVGPa/B8 3Xv0NzVeFJJGKtiMrwCnpMtar+ZN9Rv0F9dtSad5/iqwCTi3j7ie8modT1BRPyeGnqc85 Vh3JiIB0MTLoeEeCdy8jpaWBtGkJtCrIFXWilAXQthG/oBOs80CLEpn0kR1VwhGkF6Mwh nSCubTj6IMdj5zYuBvWiksJKU0vEAhYdwtzL+F30yuIMCKwMjIeVzVwgX4iYLo2AHUA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass header.from=google.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=flex--kuniyu.bounces.google.com; dkim=pass header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20260707 header.b="VE/wXq0Z"; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=209.85.210.199 Received: from mail-pf1-f199.google.com (mail-pf1-f199.google.com [209.85.210.199]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E0529606A32C for ; Sat, 7 Nov 2026 08:08:25 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 smtp.subspace.kernel.org E0529606A32C Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=flex--kuniyu.bounces.google.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20260707 header.b=VE/wXq0Z Received: by mail-pf1-f199.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-8a01e2962a1so1001599b3a.2 for ; Sat, 07 Nov 2026 00:08:25 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20260707; t=1794038905; x=1794643705; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-type:cc:to:from:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :in-reply-to:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to :content-type; bh=ezL4r4ua1RBFqrJXqddrPEFW/yvPOGvhTPdO31bBmUg=; b=VE/wXq0ZVwPv54UL4lC9s8hULEmpup18q2VZe/7rDzgYDYPXuz0kATpJ2ES3yvotp4 mHFlY3HkRHEKHh7KPu7AtAvhxZko5Z7ZSnts7+Njo3jaKwvhxLuOaUVOmKhReZeCVh6h m8ZLyDoPzSziLhxtspbC74w6yWxMcFxv/QUp9i0HUtTX5urp18aUPKwLZkerhTlBV9Ur XVHTKWyU/yUWGR3fVjDYRetqz2By6TKyWyt0cNFhKP2Q0fbkLdD1Cp4/DsBsHb441GK+ t48PHH/QDxthjUJQSD+aqaYFv6qg26VWAORqjkbBxCJSu0QWf/BYSPuocdON7ALFdiqE uulA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20260707; t=1794038905; x=1794643705; h=content-type:cc:to:from:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :in-reply-to:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=ezL4r4ua1RBFqrJXqddrPEFW/yvPOGvhTPdO31bBmUg=; b=2Dbr2Je2Islj3nqymIcFAZx/KbjwnFu3zynB4Lya7TPANjJlUXmPdMApqK/ntWJnvE fZmeRtIvk1LV7AbBrFynx9inzHN8el6rSTHwjgfPjOPhURLxyPQe3C1E0TCUEnSoQrnc KonzSz3I7irL/25zwQg9UiB63gqWJcl+ynr3P+//nqb6dGnfMzKnekqkm8hWAOdiJnOX H9aPfaRT5alzxeiQZ00YeZ9nmQPaVFl38MPU3kJsZlfiKMZQPQ8GZvvSf81FTjXM0Xnl IsTqmEYQzr/7EgdYMb4R1UHEVUO9CXanlHlVf6ctvvGL1LXxf98PHwZs/vuztb82AkcE GnMw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AL+hErHXJyvDrRnhdt4fQHY19jBGT/8ZkNX0DaEWbLlbhnDrWGJU88N5CYOWnb6SRz4EehGrP00nNhX2tZWC7XI=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: APuU4Z+e/AkSKnqzNHVzU7UCvd0J5IUAAdWpMjKCJnDf/ezbND7Bdwp+ xyLme9w7XzvmCRmbhFpzWcK+3oPzrPnivJ3mLBYC0qdidm2lMnqv3c2/51x6BN9GJtAhbcwfwXK W//9XFw== X-Received: from pffh14-n2.prod.google.com ([2002:a05:6a00:c24e:20b0:891:240a:3bb3]) (user=kuniyu job=prod-delivery.src-stubby-dispatcher) by 2002:a05:6a00:180a:b0:882:2b16:c314 with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-8b37c52ff35mr4860050b3a.52.1794038904784; Sat, 07 Nov 2026 00:08:24 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2026 08:08:24 +0000 In-Reply-To: <20261106201822.1734-1-lirongqing@baidu.com> 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 References: <20261106201822.1734-1-lirongqing@baidu.com> Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] af_unix: Fix wrong socket tested in the symmetric half of unix_state_lock_cmp_fn(). From: Kuniyuki Iwashima To: lirongqing Cc: "David S . Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , Simon Horman , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > [PATCH] af_unix: Fix wrong socket tested in the symmetric half This is net-next material, so it should be [PATCH net-next vX] af_unix: ... see Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst. On Sat, 07 Nov 2026 04:18:22 +0800, lirongqing wrote: > From: Li RongQing > > The second half of unix_state_lock_cmp_fn() is meant to mirror the > first one with the roles of a and b swapped, but it switches on b's > state again: > > if (b->sk.sk_state == TCP_LISTEN) { > switch (b->sk.sk_state) { > case TCP_CLOSE: > case TCP_ESTABLISHED: > return 1; > > The enclosing if already established that b is TCP_LISTEN, so the > switch can only reach the default label and the branch always returns > 0, "no order known", instead of the intended 1. > > Test a's state, as the first half does. The code is only compiled with > CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING, so there is no runtime memory-safety impact; the > effect is that lockdep cannot validate this nesting order of > unix_state_lock(). > > Fixes: 98f706de445b ("af_unix: Define locking order for U_LOCK_SECOND in unix_stream_connect().") Please drop the tag. As commented, the branch never hits and no real issue exists, not worth backporting. > Signed-off-by: Li RongQing > --- > net/unix/af_unix.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/net/unix/af_unix.c b/net/unix/af_unix.c > index e7a0582..501e693 100644 > --- a/net/unix/af_unix.c > +++ b/net/unix/af_unix.c > @@ -163,7 +163,7 @@ static int unix_state_lock_cmp_fn(const struct lockdep_map *_a, > > /* Should never happen. Just to be symmetric. */ > if (b->sk.sk_state == TCP_LISTEN) { > - switch (b->sk.sk_state) { > + switch (a->sk.sk_state) { > case TCP_CLOSE: > case TCP_ESTABLISHED: > return 1; > -- > 2.9.4 >