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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2019 14:59:19 +0100 From: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com> To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp> Cc: Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>, syzbot <syzbot+ec1b7575afef85a0e5ca@...kaller.appspotmail.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Qian Cai <cai@....pw>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, guro@...com, Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, Josef Bacik <jbacik@...com>, Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@...tuozzo.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>, Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>, syzkaller-bugs <syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Vladislav Yasevich <vyasevich@...il.com>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, Xin Long <lucien.xin@...il.com> Subject: Re: kernel panic: corrupted stack end in wb_workfn On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 11:59 AM Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp> wrote: > > On 2019/03/20 19:42, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: > >> I mean, yes, I agree, kernel bug bisection won't be perfect. But do > >> you see anything actionable here? > > Allow users to manually tell bisection range when > automatic bisection found a wrong commit. > > Also, allow users to specify reproducer program > when automatic bisection found a wrong commit. > > Yes, this is anti automation. But since automation can't become perfect, > I'm suggesting manual adjustment. Even if we involve manual adjustment, > the syzbot's plenty CPU resources for building/testing kernels is highly > appreciated (compared to doing manual bisection by building/testing kernels > on personal PC environments). FTR: provided an extended answer here: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/syzkaller-bugs/1BSkmb_fawo/DOcDxv_KAgAJ > > I see the larger long term bisection quality improvement (for syzbot > > and for everybody else) in doing some actual testing for each kernel > > commit before it's being merged into any kernel tree, so that we have > > less of these a single program triggers 3 different bugs, stray > > unrelated bugs, broken release boots, etc. I don't see how reliable > > bisection is possible without that. > > > > syzbot currently cannot test kernels with custom patches (unless "#syz test:" requests). > Are you saying that syzbot will become be able to test kernels with custom patches? I mean if we start improving kernel quality over time so that we have less of these a single program triggers 3 different bugs, stray unrelated bugs, broken release boots, etc, it will improve bisection quality for everybody (beside being hugely useful in itself).
Powered by blists - more mailing lists