From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_MED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_PASS,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56066C10F14 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 12:42:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23D1420818 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 12:42:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="gRh9sxKE" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730385AbfDJMmF (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Apr 2019 08:42:05 -0400 Received: from mail-it1-f194.google.com ([209.85.166.194]:37277 "EHLO mail-it1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729474AbfDJMmF (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Apr 2019 08:42:05 -0400 Received: by mail-it1-f194.google.com with SMTP id u65so3064025itc.2 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 05:42:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=60XcXPsm+dtKDfUFB9wye8yUy/nsmA6xuJqh8jSnVdg=; b=gRh9sxKEoQUM6WFgnq2G3tzQSF7a9XI4s8Czx9/Aevt0ZVjdnMdZmD1U7HZ4Gcwzh/ 3NUht8muq2dpA1PBE4Fs1r9nLdTOULuFwXYnWAaM2bxUbuHAHdnIqRVgmT8tklMvlG4c YTGqfL65xb7//Q+iZl7MnX7D7KAArdF8/GG7eS29MzPUBo8F4psbDbfJV6Y9aKSeRZIv Y5WYQlkc/iixNeO+jLYXqCimwz2vX/IwFMupc5hnTUsOtuHRFiJsGJxm/a/LSfSR3gty 3J7TWsXaDUpDjfEircAAVAdAvgE+B6Ih4wbZJI7wKX/SKB+DJgg9nVWS2B4vuBk/9KCb kI5w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=60XcXPsm+dtKDfUFB9wye8yUy/nsmA6xuJqh8jSnVdg=; b=UMrEeZsUwImh4Zb/bn/2ayl8yI9UyugtjEMa/KigCepnvLvikyyNzWmNqOSHlr2RM8 EpUnLaHmpkBnFn6w7MQhHZIu2kuYSj+O9XdVFYgdgURDjNmMGjFCNP+AYhmWg3oU7e+u o2IxhWtkUwuJvc3/N5YgIMcBIoW6WonMCSE4rGr5CZID4yLzKWd2OzaNie7BoF4Lutwc f+S2Oampkkg9duwUhBA48mpVUFndbtaDN204HmbzaOZ6ucOd/KQuFHauBHsLyz+Lw6ir 2AHZfvBKihFpIINtHz7E4JxloYgHRq0da5tF1GB8PuLqDwhSoBl+kSgQGoUMxwQWWV4r sbaQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXykICvNoC+ASNquCoT1TBmgtI9ZIluQOElPuo3xxZj6Ohgza7j 7JiEWLE/bn3KwJXoKLxSFd5i9rD6PwslbljX8t1GBA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxgjKZbsw/A+DqY/mGORXNTeBZm0FXSScUk7TecbsMfdkynCe1EQp4TdD+wTc27xyG7hNivYqgp/wX3cPf4heM= X-Received: by 2002:a24:3d8f:: with SMTP id n137mr2876577itn.96.1554900124555; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 05:42:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <00000000000051e9c2057d31a563@google.com> <00000000000036a4a9058619dff3@google.com> <20190410002603.GS2217@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <5c581e6eadc946b965e3138c9daffda75b1fba56.camel@themaw.net> <1f1d3b95189b6b8acfdf61dd05a804744791d313.camel@themaw.net> <20190410121159.GY2217@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20190410121159.GY2217@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> From: Dmitry Vyukov Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 14:41:53 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: kernel BUG at fs/inode.c:LINE! To: Al Viro Cc: Ian Kent , syzbot , Andrew Morton , Amir Goldstein , linux-fsdevel , LKML , Tetsuo Handa , syzkaller-bugs Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 2:12 PM Al Viro wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 08:07:15PM +0800, Ian Kent wrote: > > > > I'm unable to find a branch matching the line numbers. > > > > > > Given that, on the face of it, the scenario is impossible I'm > > > seeking clarification on what linux-next to look at for the > > > sake of accuracy. > > > > > > So I'm wondering if this testing done using the master branch > > > or one of the daily branches one would use to check for conflicts > > > before posting? > > > > Sorry those are tags not branches. > > FWIW, that's next-20181214; it is what master had been in mid-December > and master is rebased every day. Can it be reproduced with the current > tree? >From the info on the dashboard we know that it happened only once on d14b746c (the second one is result of reproducing the first one). So it was either fixed or just hard to trigger.