[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aDueHCMDLPs2UtY2@casper.infradead.org>
Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2025 01:26:04 +0100
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: syzbot <syzbot+c0dc46208750f063d0e0@...kaller.appspotmail.com>
Cc: asmadeus@...ewreck.org, chao@...nel.org, dhowells@...hat.com,
hch@....de, hdanton@...a.com, jaegeuk@...nel.org,
jlayton@...nel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
netfs@...ts.linux.dev, syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com,
v9fs@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [syzbot] [netfs?] kernel BUG in folio_unlock (3)
On Sat, May 31, 2025 at 04:20:02PM -0700, syzbot wrote:
> syzbot has bisected this issue to:
>
> commit 80f31d2a7e5f4efa7150c951268236c670bcb068
> Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
> Date: Thu May 8 05:14:32 2025 +0000
That's not possible; this commit is after the original report.
That said, there _is_ a double folio_unlock() in this patch, which
I'm about to send a fix for. It's just not fixing the original report.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists