On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 10:10 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. Fixed with: https://github.com/google/syzkaller/commit/2f6fb923683af1397d3d6abea0bde51a9bdcdca7 https://github.com/google/syzkaller/commit/8e1e4403ac29a60350169da5449a1497635ee13b >>> 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
