From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <email@example.com> To: Dmitry Vyukov <firstname.lastname@example.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <email@example.com>, Tetsuo Handa <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <email@example.com>, "Eric W. Biederman" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Guenter Roeck <email@example.com>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Andrew Morton <email@example.com>, syzkaller <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Stephen Rothwell <email@example.com>, David Miller <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Wu Fengguang <email@example.com> Subject: Re: what trees/branches to test on syzbot Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2018 21:22:50 -0400 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20180611012250.GD5020@thunk.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CACT4Y+Z-+5XhmyVcLjEf6531GKC-b+JL9kes-vjWF5PXJNvqrw@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 08:11:05AM +0200, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: > > The set of trees where a crash happened is visible on dashboard, so > one can see if it's only linux-next or whole set of trees. Potentially > syzbot can act differently depending on this predicate, but I don't > see what should be the difference. However, this does not fully save > from falsely assessing bugs as linux-next-only just because they > happened few times and only on linux-next so far. So how about this, only report something as being a linux-next regression if (a) there is a reproducer, and (b) the reproducer does not trigger any kind of crash on mainline? > There is also a problem with rebasing of linux-next: reported commit > hashes do not make sense and we can forget about bisection. If there is a valid reproducer, bisection should simply be a matter ofu running and if we know the reproducer doesn't trigger on mainline, then the bisection should only require no more than 8-10 VM runs. For Linux-next, this would be *super* valuable. Reporting the commit ID and the one-line commit summary will be enough for most maintainers, since even if they are using a rewinding head, so long as the bisection can be done quickly enough (e.g., within a few days), it will still be in their git repository. And if you have a reproducer, then once it's identified as a linux-next reproducer with a guilty commit, that can be confirmed by either (a) seeing if you can revert the commit and if it makes the problem go away, or (b) figure out which subsystem git tree the commit was introduced via, and then verify that the reproducer triggers on the tip of the subsystem git tree. All of this will require development effort, so I suspect it's not something we'll see from syzbot tomorrow --- but it's not *impossible*. I think though that sending e-mail about a linux-next syzbot crash if there is a reproducer and the reproducer doesn't trigger a crash on mainline should be really simple to implement, and it would add huge value without spamming the subsystem maintainers. - Ted
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-06-11 1:23 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2018-01-16 7:51 Dmitry Vyukov 2018-01-16 9:45 ` Guenter Roeck 2018-01-16 9:58 ` Dmitry Vyukov 2018-01-16 16:58 ` Guenter Roeck 2018-01-16 17:02 ` Eric W. Biederman 2018-01-16 17:34 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman 2018-01-22 13:32 ` Dmitry Vyukov 2018-06-09 6:31 ` Tetsuo Handa 2018-06-09 22:17 ` Linus Torvalds 2018-06-10 1:51 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2018-06-10 6:11 ` Dmitry Vyukov 2018-06-11 1:22 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o [this message] 2018-06-15 9:54 ` Dmitry Vyukov 2018-06-18 4:52 ` Stephen Rothwell 2018-06-18 6:10 ` Eric W. Biederman 2018-06-18 13:54 ` Alan Cox 2018-06-26 10:54 ` Tetsuo Handa 2018-06-26 14:16 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2018-06-26 14:38 ` Dmitry Vyukov 2018-06-26 14:54 ` Guenter Roeck 2018-06-26 20:37 ` Tetsuo Handa 2018-07-05 10:49 ` Tetsuo Handa 2018-07-06 23:26 ` Tetsuo Handa 2018-07-10 0:35 ` Andrew Morton 2018-07-10 2:13 ` Tetsuo Handa 2018-01-19 1:48 ` Fengguang Wu 2018-01-22 13:34 ` Dmitry Vyukov
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20180611012250.GD5020@thunk.org \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --subject='Re: what trees/branches to test on syzbot' \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.