On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 07:32:43AM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 1:52 AM Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 03:07:51PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > > [+linux-xfs]
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 02:27:36PM -0500, Ayushman Dutta wrote:
> > > > Kernel Version: 5.10.122
> > > >
> > > > Kernel revision: 58a0d94cb56fe0982aa1ce9712e8107d3a2257fe
> > > >
> > > > Syzkaller Dashboard report:
> > > >
> > > > ------------[ cut here ]------------
> > > > WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 8503 at mm/util.c:618 kvmalloc_node+0x15a/0x170
> > > > mm/util.c:618
> > >
> > > No. Do not DM your syzbot reports to random XFS developers.
> > >
> > > Especially do not send me *three message* with 300K of attachments; even
> > > the regular syzbot runners dump all that stuff into a web portal.
> > >
> > > If you are going to run some scripted tool to randomly
> > > corrupt the filesystem to find failures, then you have an
> > > ethical and moral responsibility to do some of the work to
> > > narrow down and identify the cause of the failure, not just
> > > throw them at someone else to do all the work.
> >
> > /me reads the stack trace, takes 30s to look at the change log,
> > finds commit 29d650f7e3ab ("xfs: reject crazy array sizes being fed
> > to XFS_IOC_GETBMAP*").
> >
>
> I don't have the syzbot link here, but I assume this is reproducible
> and not reproducing on mainline, so in fact syzbot should be capable
> of finding the fix commit itself.
>
> If syzbot can hear me, next time you find an xfs bug that is reproducible
> on 5.10.y and not on mainline, you may send it to me.
I suspect this guy is /not/ affiliated with the actual googlers who run
syzbot internally, which is why there's no link to their web app.
> Darrick, if you want to find a creative way to encode that request
> in MAINTAINERS as you suggested, that is fine by me.
> It should be something that makes it easy to teach the few bots that run
> on LTS kernels to find the right recipients and spam us instead of you.
> We could add a P: Subsystem Profile document, which contains stable
> maintainers info but that is less robot friendly.
> I don't have a better idea.
Yeah, I'll email the rest of the xfs lts cabal about that.
> This fix patch is in my xfs-5.10.y queue - it will probably take several
> weeks/month until it gets reviewed. I could expedite it if anyone
> feels that I should.
I don't care, but the people who think that /any/ backtrace in dmesg
might, even though this one in particular logs the warning and returns
ENOMEM.
--D
> Thanks,
> Amir.
