On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Paul Moore <pmoore@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Paul, > > We are just rolling in the process. Feedback is much appreciated! > > The idea is that we need to know the title as it will appear in Linus > tree and in other tested trees. It's also possible to override the > title later, if there is any mess with it. So sending "#syz fix" as > soon as it is merged into any tree looks like the best option (to not > require you to keep in mind that you also need to do that tiny bit in > a month). > > Are the following changes look good to you? > For email footer: > > -Once a fix for this bug is committed, please reply to this email with: > +Once a fix for this bug is merged into any tree, reply to this email with: > #syz fix: exact-commit-title > > And for the https://github.com/google/syzkaller/blob/master/docs/syzbot.md page: > > to attach a fixing commit to the bug: > #syz fix: exact-commit-title > +It's enough that the commit is merged into any tree, in particular, > +you don't need to wait for the commit to be merged into upstream tree. > +syzbot only needs to know the title by which it will appear in tested trees. > +In case of an error or a title change, you can override the commit simply > +by sending another #syz fix command. That is an improvement, yes. I might also mention that you would prefer if the syzkaller-bugs list is CC'd on the commands; that wasn't clear to me until I got a message back from syzbot just now. >> For the record, I did see that part of the syzbot mail but I was > > Then sorry for pinging. We are trying to establish the process, and > some developers don't notice that part, so I just wanted to make sure. I would *strongly* suggest spending some time trying to find a mechanism that doesn't rely on developers needing to send special commands to your system to register fixes; that seems prone to failure if you want my honest opinion. At the very least you might consider moving the instructions to the top of the message. >> waiting until I merged that patch; v2 was posted late in the week and >> I was giving it a few days in case someone saw something >> objectionable. > > In such case you can do either way. You can wait, or you can post > commit title as soon as you have enough assurance that that's the > title with which it will appear in trees. We don't want to put too > much burden on developers. As I said, it's possible to override it > later, or we will notice that there is a commit that bot is waiting > for too long. > > Thanks -- paul moore security @ redhat
