lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Dec]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/volumes.c:LINE!
On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 12:50 PM David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 05, 2019 at 12:38:38PM +0100, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 05, 2019 at 11:07:27AM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> > > The correct syntax would be (no dash + colon):
> > >
> > > #syz test: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jth/linux.git
> > > close_fs_devices
> >
> > Ah ok, thanks.
> >
> > Although syzbot already said it can't test because it has no reproducer.
> > Anyways good to know for future reports.
>
> According to
>
> https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?id=d50670eeb21302915bde3f25871dfb7ea43db1e4
>
> there is a way how to test it, many reports and the last one about a
> week old. Is there a way to instruct syzbot to run the same tests on a
> given branch?
>
> (The reproducer is basically setting up environment with limited amount
> of memory available for allocation and this hits the BUG_ON.)

syzkaller does this ("rerun the same tests") for every bug always. If
it succeeds (kernel crashes again), it results in a reproducer, that
can later be used for cause/fix bisection and patch testing. In this
case it does not reproduce, so rerunning the same tests will not lead
to anything useful (only if to false confirmation that a patch fixes
the crash).

There is a large number of reasons why a kernel crash may not
reproduce. It may be global accumulated state, non-hermetic tests,
poor syzkaller btrfs descriptions (most likely true) and others.

Need to take a closer look, on first sight it looks like something
that should be reproduced...

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-12-05 13:06    [W:0.049 / U:0.952 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site