From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 15:44:07 +0200 From: Cyril Hrubis Subject: Re: [Automated-testing] syzkaller reproducers Message-ID: <20191015134407.GA12523@rei.lan> References: <876a2abe-41ab-5819-4ae8-ad26186d0d1c@kernel.org> <226099bc-9763-3a73-e26a-b292f601494c@kernel.org> <20191011180248.GA24089@rei.lan> <20191014085414.GB31760@rei.lan> <62903a33-8ffc-56b6-de1a-539f10b5de2a@oracle.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <62903a33-8ffc-56b6-de1a-539f10b5de2a@oracle.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline List-ID: To: George Kennedy Cc: Dmitry Vyukov , shuah , "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , automated-testing@yoctoproject.org, kernelci@groups.io, Dhaval Giani , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , Boris Ostrovsky , Jan Setje-Eilers , syzkaller Hi! > >> I do not think that these scripts are ever supposed to be the used in > >> production testing, you need much more than this to produce results > >> reliably. I would expect that they are supposed to be a form of very > >> minimal documentation. > > Yes, I just added them as quick hints: some repros are 32-bits; each > > needs a new dir; some external timeout is needed for each test. > Thank you again for the collection of repro C programs! > > Hitting a lot more crashes with the collection of repro C programs than > in all the hours of running Syzkaller. Wonder why? Any idea? This is > with the same kernel and VM that Syzkaller is run on. I would guess that these reproducers are product of countless hours of fuzzing, so it's about to be expected... -- Cyril Hrubis chrubis@suse.cz