On Sat, 2019-05-25 at 09:14 +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> On 2019/05/25 2:17, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > A config option or two that help syzbot doesn't sound like a bad idea to me.
>
> Thanks for suggestion. I think that #ifdef'ing
>
> static bool suppress_message_printing(int level)
> {
>
On 2019/05/25 2:17, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> A config option or two that help syzbot doesn't sound like a bad idea to me.
Thanks for suggestion. I think that #ifdef'ing
static bool suppress_message_printing(int level)
{
return (level >= console_loglevel && !ignore_loglevel);
}
is si
On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 10:41 AM Joe Perches wrote:
>
> That could also help eliminate unnecessary pr_ output
> from object code.
Indeed. The small-config people might like it (if they haven't already
given up..)
Linus
On Fri, 2019-05-24 at 10:17 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > This patch is intended for testing on linux-next.git only, and
> > will be removed after we found what is wrong.
>
> Honestly, wouldn't it be much better to try to come up with a patch
> that might be acceptable in general.
>
> For exam
On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 8:19 AM Tetsuo Handa
wrote:
>
> This patch is intended for testing on linux-next.git only, and
> will be removed after we found what is wrong.
Honestly, wouldn't it be much better to try to come up with a patch
that might be acceptable in general.
For example, how about a
On 2019/05/24 16:55, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 11:57 AM Tetsuo Handa
> wrote:
>>
>> Well, the culprit of this problem might be syz_execute_func().
>>
>> https://twitter.com/ed_maste/status/1131165065485398016
>>
>> Then, blacklisting specific syscalls/arguments might not wor
fy which syz_execute_func() call is triggering
> this problem.
>
> From 96e0741839f56c461f85d83e20bf5ae6baac9a3a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Tetsuo Handa
> Date: Thu, 23 May 2019 05:57:52 +0900
> Subject: [PATCH] printk: Monitor change of console loglevel.
>
> We are
you send this patch to linux-next.git ?
syzbot would identify which syz_execute_func() call is triggering
this problem.
>From 96e0741839f56c461f85d83e20bf5ae6baac9a3a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Tetsuo Handa
Date: Thu, 23 May 2019 05:57:52 +0900
Subject: [PATCH] printk: Monitor change
On 2019/05/14 18:19, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (05/11/19 00:19), Tetsuo Handa wrote:
>> We are seeing syzbot reports [1] where printk() messages prior to panic()
>> are missing for unknown reason. To test whether it is due to some testcase
>> changing console loglevel, let's panic() as soon as
On (05/11/19 00:19), Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> We are seeing syzbot reports [1] where printk() messages prior to panic()
> are missing for unknown reason. To test whether it is due to some testcase
> changing console loglevel, let's panic() as soon as console loglevel has
> changed. This patch is inten
We are seeing syzbot reports [1] where printk() messages prior to panic()
are missing for unknown reason. To test whether it is due to some testcase
changing console loglevel, let's panic() as soon as console loglevel has
changed. This patch is intended for testing on linux-next.git only, and
will
11 matches
Mail list logo
