On Thu, 4 Nov 2021 at 12:44, Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 11/4/21 4:45 AM, Aleksandr Nogikh wrote: > > Hi Jeans, > > > > We'll try to figure something out. > > > > I've filed an issue to track progress on the problem. > > https://github.com/google/syzkaller/issues/2865 > > Great thanks. It's annoyed me a bit in the past, but it's really > excessive this time around. Probably because that particular patch > caused more than its fair share of problems, but still shouldn't > be an issue once it's dropped from the trees. syzbot always tests the latest working tree. In this case it's the latest linux-next tree. No dead branches were tested. The real problem here is rebased trees and dropped patches and the use of "invalid" command. For issues fixed with a commit (#syz fix) syzbot tracks precisely when the commit reaches all of the tested builds and only then closes the issue and starts reporting new occurrences as new issues. But "syz invalid" does not give syzbot a commit to track and means literally "close now", so any new occurrences are reported as new issues immediately. The intention is that it's on the user issuing the "invalid" command to do this only when the issue is really not present in any of syzbot builds anymore. There are hacks around like saying "syz fix" with some unrelated later commit that will reach linux-next upstream along with the dropped patch, then syzbot will do proper tracking on its own. Better suggestions are welcome. I think https://github.com/google/syzkaller/issues/2865 will help only in very limited number of cases (no reproducer, can't determine the subsystem tree") and in some cases can make things worse (falsely deciding to not report a real bug).
