> On Jun 27, 2020, at 7:10 PM, Eric Biggers wrote:
>
> This bug also got reported 2 days later by the kernel test robot
> (lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200623090213.GW5535@shao2-debian/).
> Then it was fixed by commit 437edcaafbe3, so telling syzbot:
>
> #syz fix: mm, slab/slub: improve error repor
[+Cc linux-mm; +Bcc linux-fsdevel]
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 03:28:09AM -0400, Qian Cai wrote:
>
>
> > On Jun 22, 2020, at 2:42 AM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> >
> > 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
> On Jun 22, 2020, at 2:42 AM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>
> 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
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 8:29 AM Qian Cai wrote:
> > On Jun 22, 2020, at 1:37 AM, syzbot
> > wrote:
> >
> > WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 0 at mm/slab.h:232 kmem_cache_free+0x0/0x200
> > mm/slab.c:2262
>
> Is there any particular reason to use CONFIG_SLAB rather than CONFIG_SLUB?
There is a reason, it's
> On Jun 22, 2020, at 1:37 AM, syzbot
> wrote:
>
> WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 0 at mm/slab.h:232 kmem_cache_free+0x0/0x200
> mm/slab.c:2262
Is there any particular reason to use CONFIG_SLAB rather than CONFIG_SLUB?
You are really asking for trouble to test something that almost nobody is
exerci
Hello,
syzbot found the following crash on:
HEAD commit:5a94f5bc Add linux-next specific files for 20200621
git tree: linux-next
console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=12a02c7610
kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=e1788c418b2ddc66
dashboard
6 matches
Mail list logo
