On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 7:25 AM Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 12/21/21 3:44 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 1:52 AM syzbot > > <syzbot+8836466a79f4175961b0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> syzbot has bisected this issue to: > >> > >> commit e4b8954074f6d0db01c8c97d338a67f9389c042f > >> Author: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> Date: Tue Dec 7 01:30:37 2021 +0000 > >> > >> netlink: add net device refcount tracker to struct ethnl_req_info > >> > > > > Unfortunately this commit will be in the way of many bisections. > > > > Real bug was added in > > > > commit 5fc11eebb4a98df5324a4de369bb5ab7f0007ff7 > > Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> > > Date: Thu Dec 9 07:31:29 2021 +0100 > > > > block: open code create_task_io_context in set_task_ioprio > > > > The flow in set_task_ioprio can be simplified by simply open coding > > create_task_io_context, which removes a refcount roundtrip on the I/O > > context. > > > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20211209063131.18537-10-hch@xxxxxx > > Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> > > There are only really 5 patches in between the broken commit and the one > that fixes it, and it only affects things trying to set the ioprio with > a dead task. Is this a huge issue? I don't see why this would cause a > lot of bisection headaches. > I was saying that my commit was polluting syzbot bisection, this is a distraction in this report. (Or if you prefer, please ignore syzbot bisection) linux-next has still this bug in set_task_ioprio() > -- > Jens Axboe >
