[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 16:48:55 +0200
From: Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@...ewreck.org>
To: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Cc: syzbot <syzbot+2222c34dc40b515f30dc@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Latchesar Ionkov <lucho@...kov.net>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Ron Minnich <rminnich@...dia.gov>,
syzkaller-bugs <syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com>,
v9fs-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: BUG: corrupted list in p9_read_work
Dmitry Vyukov wrote on Wed, Oct 10, 2018:
> > Back to the current patch, since as I said I am not confident this is a
> > good enough fix for the current bug, will I get notified if the bug
> > happens again once the patch hits linux-next with the Reported-by tag ?
> > (I don't have the setup necessary to run a syz repro as there is no C
> > repro, and won't have much time to do that setup sorry)
>
> Yes, the bug will be reported again if it still happens after the
> patch is merged (not just into linux-next, but into all tested trees,
> but it does not matter much). So marking bugs as fixed tentatively is
> fine if that's our best guess.
Ok, thanks for confirming...
> But note that syzbot can test fixes itself on request. It boils down
> to just giving it the patch and the base tree:
> https://github.com/google/syzkaller/blob/master/docs/syzbot.md#testing-patches
.. and for clarifying that bit, let's try that! :)
#syz test: git://github.com/martinetd/linux e4ca13f7d075e551dc158df6af18fb412a1dba0a
--
Dominique
Powered by blists - more mailing lists