From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dominique Martinet Subject: Re: BUG: corrupted list in p9_read_work Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 16:48:55 +0200 Message-ID: <20181010144855.GB20918@nautica> References: <000000000000ca61cd0571178677@google.com> <000000000000fddb150577c15af6@google.com> <20181009020949.GA29622@nautica> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: syzbot , David Miller , Eric Van Hensbergen , LKML , Latchesar Ionkov , netdev , Ron Minnich , syzkaller-bugs , v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net To: Dmitry Vyukov Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Dmitry Vyukov wrote on Wed, Oct 10, 2018: > > Back to the current patch, since as I said I am not confident this is a > > good enough fix for the current bug, will I get notified if the bug > > happens again once the patch hits linux-next with the Reported-by tag ? > > (I don't have the setup necessary to run a syz repro as there is no C > > repro, and won't have much time to do that setup sorry) > > Yes, the bug will be reported again if it still happens after the > patch is merged (not just into linux-next, but into all tested trees, > but it does not matter much). So marking bugs as fixed tentatively is > fine if that's our best guess. Ok, thanks for confirming... > But note that syzbot can test fixes itself on request. It boils down > to just giving it the patch and the base tree: > https://github.com/google/syzkaller/blob/master/docs/syzbot.md#testing-patches .. and for clarifying that bit, let's try that! :) #syz test: git://github.com/martinetd/linux e4ca13f7d075e551dc158df6af18fb412a1dba0a -- Dominique