Hi,
On 30/03/19 12:09, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 07:57:50PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > Yes. But what such threshold be? 0.1 second? 1 second? 10 seconds?
> > Can we find a threshold where everyone can agree on?
>
> This is what we do all day on lkml: discussing changes
On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 11:07:40PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> I think that syzbot should for now refrain from testing syscalls that change
> scheduling related attributes,
And how would we know about problems there, otherwise?
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400:
On 2019/03/30 20:09, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 07:57:50PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
>> Yes. But what such threshold be? 0.1 second? 1 second? 10 seconds?
>> Can we find a threshold where everyone can agree on?
>
> This is what we do all day on lkml: discussing changes so
On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 07:57:50PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Yes. But what such threshold be? 0.1 second? 1 second? 10 seconds?
> Can we find a threshold where everyone can agree on?
This is what we do all day on lkml: discussing changes so that (almost)
everyone is happy with them.
:-)
--
On 2019/03/30 19:45, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 07:40:11PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
>> But how can the scheduler be aware of various watchdogs' thresholds?
>
> I think what tglx means is sched_setattr() should be fixed to fail due
> to the bogus value.
>
Yes. But what
On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 07:40:11PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> But how can the scheduler be aware of various watchdogs' thresholds?
I think what tglx means is sched_setattr() should be fixed to fail due
to the bogus value.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid
On 2019/03/30 16:46, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Mar 2019, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
>> This reproducer does sched_setattr(SCHED_DEADLINE) with bogus value, as with
>> a reproducer for "INFO: rcu detected stall in sys_sendfile64" did.
>>
>> sched_setattr(0, {size=0, sched_policy=0x6 /*
On Sat, 30 Mar 2019, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> On 2019/03/30 7:34, syzbot wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > syzbot found the following crash on:
> >
> > HEAD commit: 8c2ffd91 Linux 5.1-rc2
> > git tree: upstream
> > console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=15099d2b20
> >
On 2019/03/30 7:34, syzbot wrote:
> Hello,
>
> syzbot found the following crash on:
>
> HEAD commit: 8c2ffd91 Linux 5.1-rc2
> git tree: upstream
> console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=15099d2b20
> kernel config:
9 matches
Mail list logo