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=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 2B6A3C433E0 for ; Mon, 22 Jun 2020 07:28:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F25A425466 for ; Mon, 22 Jun 2020 07:28:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lca.pw header.i=@lca.pw header.b="CEIoTrFc" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731425AbgFVH2O (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jun 2020 03:28:14 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:48230 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731406AbgFVH2M (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jun 2020 03:28:12 -0400 Received: from mail-qt1-x843.google.com (mail-qt1-x843.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::843]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 77053C061795 for ; Mon, 22 Jun 2020 00:28:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qt1-x843.google.com with SMTP id h23so4800819qtr.0 for ; Mon, 22 Jun 2020 00:28:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lca.pw; s=google; h=content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:subject:date:message-id :references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=+Uan9/0g2Kyk0+JFE+Gg6CPXTL0iWc6TM1qX4k9tCCI=; b=CEIoTrFcH9/ZEoLTpd6fmSkXQV5kJx6SiBea4C6+IwoO8z+Z1TfY40M/x2iObM6GCX Jy0tips3m8ok7iClqxkfuII3htkyFo2IDfNlN9BJlPhADjGd4YdrnLMXw4ktOca61LUM RgCJBX3fDwyzBWJfd0ozcaqZ6YmVWeYWWSAO3lq1tlxxaoTRw/zU38Dp0DN404aTxwyv 2/LqaODnfkrI2Swvw8Goi9ZK+IAOUU1I/ISmwsOvUqZHpiTgD1Sh3Ynja398PQfCSD8T x/QO1WjXLd1y8S85tUcQSR8LZeMki8SEWYs+lZdo7Dp8DrHB218NllVMmIRo8KfQ7AwQ oOKA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version :subject:date:message-id:references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=+Uan9/0g2Kyk0+JFE+Gg6CPXTL0iWc6TM1qX4k9tCCI=; b=lkW+pdNTUTH/QhNmsAY/ShyZq/KWDtJ5GvXBjLlUvFLgAkC1VR/N91O0DLMRvrwlXL Xfae/Mr+w4qH4DC+SDrN95KOAQiJ1ZCACBDB2qPdUJ5geIj8HL09Mypjbx95zvjGqGVy y/a4kxjR0Npln4QzaFMlz9lbzjA0MDMAwKZtYlrF7H/uHy+fqz8she+AF2q5wg9SBLDS orx8pjTDh3PMTyDPBOkxoqQcJldFuSGvpNEzPecHQhoGMel+kLib4rtdz82JFzavoNhf XoyW7AHBRQ1HrxKWcfil4Th+ogZNTVuaVyP1sUTZiR2WI+SYLoVl9If//MuigViiUDXC WYAg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530c9AH9LRlEkfTXs64USzeCKBmUpb0u9nTBR7t9o1aUi4aN7YOG 4H09gnXkqWdpVebTRc5raEQdaw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyWb4e97Z2/IMIqh2GpP+NVHRpesI9AkxGHkQn4/h3yxibqRZAvS1qnEvwYKJTYlHnAvtsp5w== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5307:: with SMTP id t7mr15073070qtn.229.1592810890652; Mon, 22 Jun 2020 00:28:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.183] (pool-71-184-117-43.bstnma.fios.verizon.net. [71.184.117.43]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k20sm14406128qtu.16.2020.06.22.00.28.09 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 22 Jun 2020 00:28:10 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: Qian Cai Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Subject: Re: linux-next boot error: WARNING in kmem_cache_free Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2020 03:28:09 -0400 Message-Id: <121C0D57-C9E6-406B-A280-A67E773EA9D0@lca.pw> References: Cc: syzbot , linux-fsdevel , LKML , Linux-Next Mailing List , Stephen Rothwell , syzkaller-bugs , Al Viro In-Reply-To: To: Dmitry Vyukov X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (17F80) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > On Jun 22, 2020, at 2:42 AM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: >=20 > There is a reason, it's still important for us. > But also it's not our strategy to deal with bugs by not testing > configurations and closing eyes on bugs, right? If it's an official > config in the kernel, it needs to be tested. If SLAB is in the state > that we don't care about any bugs in it, then we need to drop it. It > will automatically remove it from all testing systems out there. Or at > least make it "depends on BROKEN" to slowly phase it out during > several releases. Do you mind sharing what=E2=80=99s your use cases with CONFIG_SLAB? The only= thing prevents it from being purged early is that it might perform better w= ith a certain type of networking workloads where syzbot should have nothing t= o gain from it. I am more of thinking about the testing coverage that we could use for syzbo= t to test SLUB instead of SLAB. Also, I have no objection for syzbot to test= SLAB, but then from my experience, you are probably on your own to debug fu= rther with those testing failures. Until you are able to figure out the bugg= y patch or patchset introduced the regression, I am afraid not many people w= ould be able to spend much time on SLAB. The developers are pretty much alre= ady half-hearted on it by only fixing SLAB here and there without runtime te= sting it.=