[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGxU2F5Q09wFbhfoGB-Wa_0xQFoP8Ah34vqf4gG3DRFdPny1fQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2023 12:58:20 +0100
From: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com>
To: syzbot <syzbot+befff0a9536049e7902e@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
Bobby Eshleman <bobby.eshleman@...edance.com>,
Bobby Eshleman <bobby.eshleman@...il.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, stefanha@...hat.com,
syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
Krasnov Arseniy <oxffffaa@...il.com>,
Krasnov Arseniy Vladimirovich <AVKrasnov@...rdevices.ru>
Subject: Re: [syzbot] [kvm?] [net?] [virt?] general protection fault in virtio_transport_purge_skbs
On Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 10:06 AM Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 9:55 AM Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 9:31 AM Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Bobby,
> > > can you take a look at this report?
> > >
> > > It seems related to the changes we made to support skbuff.
> >
> > Could it be a problem of concurrent access to pkt_queue ?
> >
> > IIUC we should hold pkt_queue.lock when we call skb_queue_splice_init()
> > and remove pkt_list_lock. (or hold pkt_list_lock when calling
> > virtio_transport_purge_skbs, but pkt_list_lock seems useless now that
> > we use skbuff)
> >
>
Patch posted here:
https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20230324115450.11268-1-sgarzare@redhat.com/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists