[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <F17EC83C-9D70-463A-9C46-FBCC53A1F13C@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2023 10:55:47 -0700
From: Astra Joan <astrajoan@...oo.com>
To: o.rempel@...gutronix.de
Cc: Astra Joan <astrajoan@...oo.com>,
davem@...emloft.net,
edumazet@...gle.com,
ivan.orlov0322@...il.com,
kernel@...gutronix.de,
kuba@...nel.org,
linux-can@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux@...pel-privat.de,
mkl@...gutronix.de,
netdev@...r.kernel.org,
pabeni@...hat.com,
robin@...tonic.nl,
skhan@...uxfoundation.org,
socketcan@...tkopp.net,
syzbot+1591462f226d9cbf0564@...kaller.appspotmail.com,
syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] can: j1939: prevent deadlock by changing j1939_socks_lock
to rwlock
Hi Oleksij,
Thank you for providing help with the bug fix! The patch was created
when I was working on another bug:
https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=881d65229ca4f9ae8c84
But the patch was not a direct fix of the problem reported in the
unregister_netdevice function call. Instead, it suppresses potential
deadlock information to guarantee the real bug would show up. Since I
have verified that the patch resolved a deadlock situation involving
the exact same locks, I'm pretty confident it would be a proper fix for
the current bug in this thread.
I'm not sure, though, about how I could instruct Syzbot to create a
reproducer to properly test this patch. Could you or anyone here help
me find the next step? Thank you so much!
Best regards,
Ziqi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists