On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 4:02 PM, Theodore Y. Ts'o <ty...@mit.edu> wrote: > On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:49:54AM +0200, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: >> Hi Ted, >> >> Did you follow all instructions (commit, config, compiler, etc)? >> syzbot does not have any special magic, it just executes the described >> steps and then collects the kernel crash output it sees. > > No, I didn't. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to repro it on > exactly the config, commit, compiler. And debugging tons of Syzkaller > commits is not on my OKR list, and I have lots of P0/P1 bugs and > projects that are competing for my attention. > > I tried repro'ing it using the standard compiler, and using -rc4 as a > base. If it doesn't repro there, using my standard kernel config --- > and it requires root, and in my judgement it's *highly* unlikely to > happen in real life --- then it becomes a P2 or P3 bug, it's not worth > my time to build a kernel using exactly the commit, config, and > compiler that Syzkaller specified. Someday, you or I or someone else > will build at tool that builds the kernel in a GCE VM, using the > specified config and a compiler, and which minimizes the amount of > human toil needed to do the sort of investigation you seem to want to > dump on upstream developers. > > There's a *reason* why many upstream developers have been asking for > improvements in the syzkaller tool to reduce toil. If it's fair for > you to ask for us to do work, then it's also fair for us to ask you to > do work. And if the answer is "sorry, I don't have the time; other > things are higher priority", that's a fair answer coming from both > sides.
Hi Ted, I am working on syzbot/syzkaller all of my time. Repro script is on my plate: https://github.com/google/syzkaller/issues/563. I will do it. Not because somebody asks me, but because I am interested in making kernel more correct, stable and secure.
