On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 11:22 AM, Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 9:01 PM, Eric W. Biederman >> <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >>> >>>> On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 12:11 PM, J. Bruce Fields <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 06:33:02AM -0700, syzbot wrote: >>>>>> syzbot has found a reproducer for the following crash on: >>>>>> >>>>>> HEAD commit: 5ed5da74de9e Add linux-next specific files for 20180813 >>>>>> git tree: linux-next >>>>> >>>>> I fetched linux-next but don't have 5ed5da74de9e. >>>> >>>> Hi Bruce, >>>> >>>> +Stephen for the disappeared linux-next commit. >>>> >>>> On the dashboard link you can see that it also happened on a more >>>> recent commit 4e8b38549b50459a22573d756dd1f4e1963c2a8d that I do see >>>> now in linux-next. >>>> >>>>> I'm also not sure why I'm on the cc for this. >>>> >>>> You've been pointed to by "./scripts/get_maintainer.pl -f fs/fcntl.c" >>>> as maintainer of the file, which is the file where the crash happened. >>> >>> You need to use your reproducer to bisect and find the commit that >>> caused this. Otherwise you will continue to confuse people. >>> >>> get_maintainer.pl is not a good target for automated reporting >>> especially against linux-next. >> >> Hi Eric, >> >> We will do bisection. >> But I afraid it will not give perfect attribution for a number of reasons: >> - broken build/boot which happens sometimes for prolonged periods and >> prohibits bisection >> - elusive races that can't be reproduced reliably and thus bisection >> can give wrong results >> - bugs introduced too long ago (e.g. author email is not even valid today) >> - reproducers triggering more than 1 bug, so base bisection commit >> can actually be for another bug, or bisection can switch from one bug >> to another >> - last but not least, bugs without reproducers >> Bisection will add useful information to the bug report, but it will >> not necessary make attribution better than it is now. >> >> Do you have more examples where bugs were misreported? From what I see >> current attrition works well. There are episodic fallouts, but well, >> nothing is perfect in this world. Humans don't bisect frequently and >> misreport sometimes. I think we just need to re-route bugs in such >> cases. > > I have yet to see syzbot make a good report. Especially against > linux-next. Well, first of all, we are not aware of any massive problems because nobody tells us. What are the systematic problems that affect lots of reports? I took few recent ones. Anything wrong with them? https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/7/15/230 https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/7/18/992 https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/4/19/705 https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/syzkaller-bugs/F7KnbAmMa7E/VSbaYHyQCAAJ
