[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8b61a0ec-3d39-43c4-b008-b2a09443773f@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 08:29:08 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: John <john.cs.hey@...il.com>, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Bug] "BUG: soft lockup in unwind_get_return_address" in Linux
kernel v6.15-rc5
On 5/22/25 08:09, John wrote:
> I am writing to report a potential vulnerability I encountered during
> testing of the Linux Kernel version v6.15-rc5.
Hi John,
Could you tell us a little more about the overall environment here? It
seems like you're running syzkaller and just reporting whenever you see
a splat. Is that about right? Could you tell us a little more about why
you are doing this? What is your goal?
I think Steve's advice he gave you yesterday applies to this one as well:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250521133137.1b2f2cac@gandalf.local.home/
Feel free to _run_ with KASAN enabled, but please don't report issues
unless you can reproduce without KASAN. Unless it's an actual KASAN
error report, of course.
But, in general syzkaller produces a ton of noise. Unless you have a
reproducer or a _clear_ bug, I'm not sure it's very worth sending these
reports. There's honestly not much we can do with them.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists