Re: general protection fault in __xfrm_policy_bysel_ctx

[Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>]

Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> wrote:
> > syzbot <syzbot+e6e1fe9148cffa18cf97@syzkaller.appspotmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > syzbot found the following crash on:
> > >
> > > HEAD commit:    085c4c7dd2b6 net: lmc: remove -I. header search path
> > > git tree:       net-next
> > > console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=12347128c00000
> > > kernel config:  https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=505743eba4e4f68
> > > dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=e6e1fe9148cffa18cf97
> > > compiler:       gcc (GCC) 9.0.0 20181231 (experimental)
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, I don't have any reproducer for this crash yet.
> >
> > net-next doesn't contain the fixes for the rbtree fallout yet, so
> > this might already be fixed (fingers crossed).
> 
> Hi Florian,
> 
> What is that fix for the record?

I don't know.  I managed to add every bug class imagineable in that series 8-(

The last (most recent) fix from the 'fallout cleanup' is:
12750abad517a991c4568969bc748db302ab52cd
("xfrm: policy: fix infinite loop when merging src-nodes")

so if syzkaller can generate a splat with that change present
something is still broken.

> We will need to close this later. Or perhaps we can already mark this
> as fixed by that patch with "#syz fix:" command?

There are a lot of open xfrm related splats that could all be explained
by the rbtree bugs (one had a reproducer, the fix has appropriate
reported-by tag).

It would be great if there was a way to tell syzkaller to report those
again if they still appear.
I could pretend and claim above commit as "sys-fix", but it seems fishy.

Let me know and I can tag all of them.