linux-kernel - Re: kernel panic: Out of memory and no killable processes... (2)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 23 Mar 2018 19:40:08 +0900
From:   Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To:     syzbot <syzbot+8630e35fc7287b392aac@...kaller.appspotmail.com>
Cc:     aarcange@...hat.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, guro@...com,
        kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, mhocko@...e.com, mingo@...nel.org,
        rientjes@...gle.com, syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com,
        yang.s@...baba-inc.com
Subject: Re: kernel panic: Out of memory and no killable processes... (2)

On 2018/01/29 2:58, syzbot wrote:
> This bug is generated by a dumb bot. It may contain errors.
> See https://goo.gl/tpsmEJ for details.
> Direct all questions to syzkaller@...glegroups.com.
> 
> syzbot will keep track of this bug report.
> If you forgot to add the Reported-by tag, once the fix for this bug is merged
> into any tree, please reply to this email with:
> #syz fix: exact-commit-title
> If you want to test a patch for this bug, please reply with:
> #syz test: git://repo/address.git branch
> and provide the patch inline or as an attachment.
> To mark this as a duplicate of another syzbot report, please reply with:
> #syz dup: exact-subject-of-another-report
> If it's a one-off invalid bug report, please reply with:
> #syz invalid
> Note: if the crash happens again, it will cause creation of a new bug report.
> Note: all commands must start from beginning of the line in the email body.

#syz fix: netfilter: x_tables: make allocation less aggressive

Why not to backport to 4.13+ ?