[PATCH net v2] sctp: fix addip_serial increment on ASCONF_ACK allocation failure

luoqing <[email protected]> Tue, 4 Aug 2026 10:55:14 +0800
Newsgroups org.kernel.vger.linux-sctp,org.kernel.vger.netdev
Message-ID <[email protected]>
From: Qing Luo <[email protected]>

In sctp_process_asconf(), when sctp_make_asconf_ack() fails to allocate
the ASCONF_ACK chunk due to memory pressure, the code jumps to the
done label where asoc->peer.addip_serial is unconditionally incremented.

This leaves the peer's ASCONF (serial N) unacknowledged while the local
endpoint now expects serial N+1. When the peer retransmits serial N, it
falls into the serial < addip_serial + 1 branch ,
which attempts to look up a cached ACK for serial N. No cached ACK
exists since the allocation failed, so the retransmission is silently
discarded. The peer eventually times out and ABORTs the association.

Move the addip_serial increment inside the if (asconf_ack) block so that
the serial number is only advanced when the ASCONF_ACK is successfully
created and cached. This way, on allocation failure, the serial number
is unchanged and the peer's retransmitted ASCONF will be correctly
re-processed.

Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2")
Signed-off-by: Qing Luo <[email protected]>
---
 net/sctp/sm_make_chunk.c | 3 +--
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/sctp/sm_make_chunk.c b/net/sctp/sm_make_chunk.c
index c02809264075..30c0da27430e 100644
--- a/net/sctp/sm_make_chunk.c
+++ b/net/sctp/sm_make_chunk.c
@@ -3327,12 +3327,11 @@ struct sctp_chunk *sctp_process_asconf(struct sctp_association *asoc,
 			goto done;
 	}
 done:
-	asoc->peer.addip_serial++;
-
 	/* If we are sending a new ASCONF_ACK hold a reference to it in assoc
 	 * after freeing the reference to old asconf ack if any.
 	 */
 	if (asconf_ack) {
+		asoc->peer.addip_serial++;
 		sctp_chunk_hold(asconf_ack);
 		list_add_tail(&asconf_ack->transmitted_list,
 			      &asoc->asconf_ack_list);
-- 
2.25.1
> nit: missing quotation marks around the subject
> LGTM, except the nit Jakub pointed out.
Correct the code formatting