From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [90.155.50.34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BAD0A151CF5 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 14:55:52 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=90.155.50.34 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706540154; cv=none; b=C0T5/HIXYvsdU0nl2vciIvF9J7sHGCXXBmdb3gyM0baH+c1v3O6UbIOv/mCv8EfHWWqGIwE6S7k2YFIvSkBRBbQR05g8t1N+dZng5oBK251WmrJ6v1BFW0YKkQlp2xij+hc6qw03bifqO+z4sGw6R1FKZQt1l288jIrD+WvK0jc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706540154; c=relaxed/simple; bh=xfUiB8wvjyFX013Mv3QWb1yK6cu/K8yFkVaHWgxs+ZM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=LRbRwGqfWG+Oi7TnEt7KibDYmvJfQ/blSKNmaYd48qz7kallUl1GOac300EY77MSoebAnlqnII/of4av/UZ7HzcU1LfGIuOtYC7cpqgH78fLjfxpQfmr9gcgyTszvXJa0hqJrMN0xakrSyqJX/sKNYwUau9jVyciSjIKXV08x7Q= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b=cLKcFRaK; arc=none smtp.client-ip=90.155.50.34 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="cLKcFRaK" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=TrkooSyhdXbj7EF1JaDzY488CLjZJ3kn1skh2fGPgEo=; b=cLKcFRaKqigr4dZ0QaOE1HnMHu RemHrAs+ZoXxi+b9GuSiAyclCHERfe+jOpQlxnElBP42XDW1E1h+zG2etAi54e7Yt1orheef5V/Pp m7XXzg5Yqgn/dWiEeC3TeXM5UeWkt6Ma6ma+ir/QqXeqa24fcBf2nTWdnwHZV9yXJl0AR+vFnarI7 Jc+fiesQrKk6m6315E/j+BHS3zIZ98Qewyd6vlJMBO33LLewhzCC98g/fRVJOJJZBn6Kq5ToKbrNX hoDLClS4PbRzr5Hc9exJTDD3UKE4XVRibaeNgf0s50jL9ucAmtejtZHRue2xUGBknUxO+vP6wJizq VVVhHQNw==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1rUT35-00000006uAF-1ms1; Mon, 29 Jan 2024 14:55:47 +0000 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 14:55:47 +0000 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Dave Kleikamp Cc: Manas Ghandat , Linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org, jfs-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, syzbot+411debe54d318eaed386@syzkaller.appspotmail.com, Sasha Levin Subject: Re: [PATCH] jfs: fix shift-out-of-bounds in dbJoin Message-ID: References: <20231011143937.31996-1-ghandatmanas@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 08:39:18AM -0600, Dave Kleikamp wrote: > On 1/28/24 2:49PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 08:09:37PM +0530, Manas Ghandat wrote: > > > Currently while joining the leaf in a buddy system there is shift out > > > of bound error in calculation of BUDSIZE. Added the required check > > > to the BUDSIZE and fixed the documentation as well. > > > > This patch causes xfstests to fail frequently. The one this trace is > > from was generic/074. > > Thanks for catching this. The sanity test is not right, so we need to revert > that one. Unfortunately, my overnight test run with this patch reverted crashed again with the same signature. I also reverted the parent commit, and when that crashed I also reverted the parent of that. Which also crashed. So maybe there's something else that makes this unstable. Or maybe my bisect went wrong. Or _something_. Anyway, I'm going to spend much of today hammering on generic/074 with various kernel versions and see what I can deduce. So far I see no evidence that v6.7 crashes with g/074. And I know that next-20240125 does crash with g/074. I'm pretty sure that v6.8-rc1 also crashes with g/074, but will confirm that.