[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201008150518.GG20115@casper.infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2020 16:05:18 +0100
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc: syzbot <syzbot+cdcbdc0bd42e559b52b9@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
io-uring@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: inconsistent lock state in xa_destroy
On Thu, Oct 08, 2020 at 09:01:57AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 10/8/20 9:00 AM, syzbot wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > syzbot found the following issue on:
> >
> > HEAD commit: e4fb79c7 Add linux-next specific files for 20201008
> > git tree: linux-next
> > console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=12555227900000
> > kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=568d41fe4341ed0f
> > dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=cdcbdc0bd42e559b52b9
> > compiler: gcc (GCC) 10.1.0-syz 20200507
> >
> > Unfortunately, I don't have any reproducer for this issue yet.
> >
> > IMPORTANT: if you fix the issue, please add the following tag to the commit:
> > Reported-by: syzbot+cdcbdc0bd42e559b52b9@...kaller.appspotmail.com
>
> Already pushed out a fix for this, it's really an xarray issue where it just
> assumes that destroy can irq grab the lock.
... nice of you to report the issue to the XArray maintainer.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists