From: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
To: Aleksandr Nogikh <[email protected]>
Cc: syzbot
<[email protected]>,
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected]
Subject: Re: [syzbot] Monthly io-uring report
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2023 13:20:53 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANp29Y66H4-+d4hat_HCJck=u8dTn9Hw5KNzm1aYifQArQNNEw@mail.gmail.com>
On 3/27/23 1:12?PM, Aleksandr Nogikh wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 8:23?PM Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On 3/27/23 5:01?AM, syzbot wrote:
>>> 1873 Yes WARNING in split_huge_page_to_list (2)
>>> https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=07a218429c8d19b1fb25
>>> 38 Yes KASAN: use-after-free Read in nfc_llcp_find_local
>>> https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=e7ac69e6a5d806180b40
>>
>> These two are not io_uring. Particularly for the latter, I think syzbot
>> has a tendency to guess it's io_uring if any kind of task_work is
>> involved. That means anything off fput ends up in that bucket. Can we
>> get that improved please?
>
> Sure, I'll update the rules and rerun the subsystem recognition.
>
> Currently syzbot sets io_uring if at least one is true
> a) The crash stack trace points to the io_uring sources (according to
> MAINTAINERS)
> b) At least one reproducer has the syz_io_uring_setup call (that's a
> helper function that's part of syzkaller).
>
> In general syzbot tries to minimize the reproducer, but unfortunately
> sometimes there remain some calls, which are not necessary per se. It
> definitely tried to get rid of them, but the reproducer was just not
> working with those calls cut out. Maybe they were just somehow
> affecting the global state and in the execution log there didn't exist
> any other call candidates, which could have fulfilled the purpose just
> as well.
>
> I can update b) to "all reproducers have syz_io_uring_setup". Then
> those two bugs won't match the criteria.
> If it doesn't suffice and there are still too many false positives, I
> can drop b) completely.
Whatever cuts down on the noise is good with me. Not sure how 38 above
got lumped in? Maybe someone else did syz_io_uring_setup at some point?
> By the way, should F: fs/io-wq.c also be added to the IO_URING's
> record in the MAINTAINERS file?
I think you're looking at a really old tree, none of the supported
stable trees even have any io_uring code in fs/ anymore. Maybe they need
a MAINTAINERS update though? But even 5.10-stable has io-wq included,
though it's pointing at the wrong path now...
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-27 19:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-27 11:01 [syzbot] Monthly io-uring report syzbot
2023-03-27 18:23 ` Jens Axboe
2023-03-27 19:12 ` Aleksandr Nogikh
2023-03-27 19:20 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2023-03-27 20:12 ` Aleksandr Nogikh
2023-03-27 19:21 ` Eric Biggers
2023-03-27 19:25 ` Jens Axboe
2023-03-27 19:56 ` Eric Biggers
2023-03-27 20:00 ` Jens Axboe
2023-03-27 20:21 ` Aleksandr Nogikh
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox