On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 5:14 PM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 4/30/18 9:02 AM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 3:49 PM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > ... > >>>> It just extracted kernel source file name that looked relevant >>>> to this crash and run get_maintainers.pl on it. >>>> Also the image can contain dynamically generated data, which makes it >>>> impossible to have as a file at all. >>> >>> I guess I'm not sure what this means, can you explain? >> >> Say, a value that we generally pass to close system call is not static >> and can't be dumped to a static file. It's whatever a previous open >> system call has returned. Inside of the program we memorize the return >> value of open in a variable and then pass it to close. This generally >> stands for all system calls. Say, an image can contain an uid, and >> that uid can be obtained from a system call too. > > Ok, but that's the syscall side. You are operating on a static xfs image, > correct? We're only asking for the actual filesystem you're operating > against. > > (When I say "image" I am talking only about the filesystem itself, not any > other syzkaller state) > > ... > >>> That was not at all clear to me. I thought when syzkaller was telling us >>> "on upstream commit XYZ," it meant that it had identified commit XYZ as bad. >>> I'm not sure if anyone else made that mistake, but perhaps you could also clarify >>> the bug report text in this regard? >> >> Suggestions are welcome. Currently it says "syzbot hit the following >> crash on upstream commit SHA1", which was supposed to mean just the >> state of the source tree when the crash happened. But I am not a >> native speaker, so perhaps I am saying not what I intend to say. >> >> There are also suggestions on report format improvement from +Ted >> currently in works: >> https://github.com/google/syzkaller/issues/565#issuecomment-380792942 >> Not sure if they make this distinction 100% clear, though. > > Maybe I was the only one who misunderstood, but something like > > git tree: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git > HEAD: f5c754d63d06 mm/swap_state.c: make bool enable_vma_readahead and swap_vma_readahead() > > to make it clear that it has not identified that commit as the culprit, it's > just the head of the tree you were testing? (I think I have the correct git > nomenclature ...) This is done now, you can see example of new format here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/5/8/36 It says "HEAD commit" and also "syzbot engineers can be reached at <email>". -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
