On 9/23/20 2:06 PM, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 7:42 PM Brooke Basile <brookebasile@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 9/22/20 3:38 AM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 9:26 AM Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 08:49:39AM +0200, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 8:21 AM syzbot
<syzbot+4d2d56175b934b9a7bf9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hello,
syzbot has tested the proposed patch and the reproducer did not trigger any issue:
Reported-and-tested-by: syzbot+4d2d56175b934b9a7bf9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Tested on:
commit: 98477740 Merge branch 'rcu/urgent' of git://git.kernel.org..
git tree: upstream
kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=2c523334171d074
dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=4d2d56175b934b9a7bf9
compiler: gcc (GCC) 10.1.0-syz 20200507
Note: testing is done by a robot and is best-effort only.
Hi Brooke,
As far as I understand, UBS is currently completely broken on upstream
HEAD, so testing any USB bugs on upstream HEAD will lead to false
positive results only.
Broken in what way? I don't see any bug reports here...
I mean this "USB driver ID matching broke":
https://groups.google.com/g/syzkaller/c/VKfxh__m05w/m/ArzTtar-AgAJ
syzkaller can't test usb, nor reproduce any existing bugs on the upstream tree.
Hi Dmitry,
Thanks for the heads up and for the link to the thread with the information.
I recently fixed the following bug:
https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?id=cabffad18eb74197f84871802fd2c5117b61febf
I tested this on my local syzkaller instance before sending it in to
syzbot and the kernel panic was resolved, however I did get "-busid- is
not in match_busid table... skip!" in dmesg-- should this be taken as a
false positive as well?
Hi Brooke,
Yes, this line means that the kernel is broken and testing USB
programs with syzkaller is impossible.
Thanks!
Gotcha, I'll hold off on working on USB bugs for now then.
The above patch has already been applied to the ath-next tree:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11769845/
Should I have the patch reverted or is it safe to assume that any
regressions will be caught in the -next tree?
Thank you,
Brooke Basile
