On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 03:47:56PM +0200, Dominique Martinet wrote: > Christoph Hellwig wrote on Wed, Jul 15, 2020: > > FYI, this is now generating daily syzbot reports, so I'd love to see > > the fix going into Linus' tree ASAP.. > > Yes, I'm getting some syzbot warnings as well now. > > I had however only planned to get this in linux-next, since that is what > the syzbot mails were complaining about, but I see this got into -rc5... > > > It's honestly just a warn on something that would fail anyway so I'd > rather let it live in -next first, I don't get why syzbot is so verbose > about this - it sent a mail when it found a c repro and one more once it > bisected the commit yesterday but it should not be sending more?
Yes, I agree that this is just a warning on existing behavior. But then again these constant syzbot reports are pretty annoying.. > (likewise it should pick up the fix tag even if it only gets in -next, > or would it keep being noisy unless this gets merged to mainline?) > > > FWIW this is along with the 5 other patches I have queued for 5.9 > waiting for my tests as my infra is still down, I've stopped trying to > make promises, but I could push at least just this one to -next if that > really helps. > Sorry for that, things should be smoother once I've taken the time to > put things back in place. No need to be sorry, just through it might be worth to ping you. Thanks for all your help!
