linux-kernel - Re: what trees/branches to test on syzbot

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <CABXOdTf+CoB6EkhG1yPtB4NNtohbex=ebHLX7YW5TyQQGn9byw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 16 Jan 2018 01:45:50 -0800
From:   Guenter Roeck <groeck@...gle.com>
To:     Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        syzkaller <syzkaller@...glegroups.com>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: what trees/branches to test on syzbot

On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 11:51 PM, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Several people proposed that linux-next should not be tested on
> syzbot. While some people suggested that it needs to test as many
> trees as possible. I've initially included linux-next as it is a
> staging area before upstream tree, with the intention that patches are
> _tested_ there, is they are not tested there, bugs enter upstream
> tree. And then it takes much longer to get fix into other trees.
>
> So the question is: what trees/branches should be tested? Preferably
> in priority order as syzbot can't test all of them.
>

I always thought that -next existed specifically to give people a
chance to test the code in it. Maybe the question is where to report
the test results ?

Guenter