On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 2:08 PM, Pavel Machek <pa...@ucw.cz> wrote: > On Mon 2018-01-15 11:08:12, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 12:18 PM, Pavel Machek <pa...@ucw.cz> wrote: >> > On Thu 2018-01-04 12:09:26, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Pavel Machek <pa...@ucw.cz> wrote: >> >> >> On Thu, 2018-01-04 at 10:25 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: >> >> >> > Hi! >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > Some of syzbot emails don't appear on LKML mailing lists, while >> >> >> > > they >> >> >> > > were mailed as any other emails. Here are few examples: >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > "KASAN: use-after-free Read in rds_tcp_dev_event" >> >> >> > > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/syzkaller-bugs/nEeIAsNLWL4/1GzamOmRAwAJ >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > "general protection fault in __wake_up_common" >> >> >> > > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/syzkaller-bugs/4TrrZ0bIViw/rBcYLUJHAgAJ >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > Does anybody know how to get in contact with real people behind >> >> >> > > LKML >> >> >> > > and/or bugzilla? >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Not delivering syzbot emails might be good thing? >> >> >> >> >> >> Nah, the thing is finding and reporting bugs just like a human would, >> >> >> it just doesn't need sleep etc, so sometimes reports more than humans >> >> >> can keep up with. It needs a smarter brother.. but then again, maybe >> >> >> not, if bots start fixing things too, a lot of meatware hackers would >> >> >> have to go find real jobs. >> >> > >> >> > Sending random, unrepeatable Oopses to lkml is not what humans would >> >> > do, and perhaps not something bots should do, either. >> >> >> >> >> >> Hi Pavel, >> >> >> >> I've answered this question here in full detail. In short, this is >> >> useful and actionable. >> >> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/syzkaller/2nVn_XkVhEE/GjjfISejCgAJ >> > >> > I've already deleted many such reports from my lkml folder. It >> > definitely is below quality of normal bug reports. >> >> >> Pavel, if you point to exact deficiencies in the process and propose >> ways to improve it, we can turn this into a positive, constructive and >> actionable discussion. >> >> In lots of cases (~50%) quality of syzbot reports is equal to human >> reports, or _higher_. >> It provides exact kernel commit, config, compiler, stand-alone C >> reproducer and a nice, symbolized report even with inline frames. You >> don't always get all of this from human reports. >> >> In the remaining cases (no reproducer), quality of syzbot reports is >> the _same_ as for human reports. >> Say, your machine randomly crashes. You reboot it, but it crashes >> again after some time. You try to repeat what you did before the crash >> (say, opened a particular web page), but it does not reproduce the >> crash. But one way or another, it happened and it's a kernel bug > > I have not seen a good quality report from syzbot, yet.
I don't know how many you checked, so I don't know how to interpret this. If you want to see one, grep kernel commit log for syzbot, get bug id, search for it in https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/syzkaller-bugs > Normally, humans agregate test reports, and test patches etc. Can you > step between robot and lkml, and provide same services humans usually > provide? syzbot does all of this already.
