On Wed Sep 30, 2026 at 7:48 PM EDT, netdev-bot+sinfo wrote:
> Hi!
>
> This is an automated message. This series looks like a fix, but its
> commit messages seem to be missing some information:
>
> - How the issue was discovered, e.g. hit in production, hit during
> development, syzbot report, manual code inspection, LLM or static
> analysis tool scan.
>
> - Whether the issue was actually triggered, or is only theoretical
> (e.g. found by code inspection). If it was triggered please include
> the symptoms, like the stack trace or error messages.
>
> Please do not repost the series just to address the above. Instead,
> reply to this email with the missing information, so that reviewers
> can take it into account. If the series needs another revision for
> other reasons, please include the information in the commit messages
> then.
>
> The evaluation is done by an LLM so it may be wrong, if you think
> that is the case please reply and explain.
This patch could be taken as a fix with:
Fixes: 6b46ca260e22 ("net: psp: add socket security association code")
The main caveat is that the premise of defeaturing PSP listen sockets
relies on two net-next commits:
commit 8cc3aef0cb19 ("tcp: Do not allow buggy transitions between ehash and
lhash2.")
commit 404381b4f105 ("tcp: Set unhashed_state in
inet_twsk_hashdance_schedule().")
without the above commits, the part of the commit message about
defeaturing listen sockets is not true. I considered having just this
patch go into net without the promise of defeaturing PSP on listen
sockets, but I thought that would be suspect, because a reviewer could
point out that we are jumping through hoops to restrict to establishd,
but the socket could then be disconnected and transitioned to listen.
