On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 06:24:43PM +0200, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: > On Mon, 12 Jul 2021 at 18:14, Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > It looks like the second patch you submitted was hand-edited and still > > > quoted. > > > > > > And looking at the dashboard it seems like no patch was applied for your > > > second test attempt: > > > > > > https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=72af3105289dcb4c055b > > > > Yes, that explains it. Funny how easy it is to miss those "> " > > markings -- you just get too used to them. > > > > > I've been bitten by something like this before when erroneously thinking > > > that a test command could be submitted as a reply to a patch. > > > > > > Perhaps the report mail could include the patch tested or something so > > > we don't spend time investigating syzbot interface failures. > > > > Good idea. > > The email always include the patch tested (as syzbot parsed it), see > e.g. earlier reply in this thread: > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/00000000000074f06705c6ccd2a4@xxxxxxxxxx/ The email doesn't include the patch; it includes a _link_ to the patch. And the email does not contain any indication when no patch was parsed, other than the missing "patch:" link -- which is not particularly obvious if you aren't looking for it specifically: https://marc.info/?l=linux-usb&m=162602190812912&w=2 > > Anyway, here's the patch again, this time properly formatted. Hopefully > > now it will work. > > syzbot parsed this patch successfully: > https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=72af3105289dcb4c055b Yes, and it worked. Time to submit it. Alan Stern
