Re: [syzbot] general protection fault in set_task_ioprio
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Date: 2021-12-21 16:04:12
Also in:
lkml, netdev
On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 7:25 AM Jens Axboe [off-list ref] wrote:
On 12/21/21 3:44 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:quoted
On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 1:52 AM syzbot [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
syzbot has bisected this issue to: commit e4b8954074f6d0db01c8c97d338a67f9389c042f Author: Eric Dumazet [off-list ref] Date: Tue Dec 7 01:30:37 2021 +0000 netlink: add net device refcount tracker to struct ethnl_req_infoUnfortunately this commit will be in the way of many bisections. Real bug was added in commit 5fc11eebb4a98df5324a4de369bb5ab7f0007ff7 Author: Christoph Hellwig [off-list ref] Date: Thu Dec 9 07:31:29 2021 +0100 block: open code create_task_io_context in set_task_ioprio The flow in set_task_ioprio can be simplified by simply open coding create_task_io_context, which removes a refcount roundtrip on the I/O context. Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig [off-list ref] Reviewed-by: Jan Kara [off-list ref] Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20211209063131.18537-10-hch@lst.de (local) Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe [off-list ref]There are only really 5 patches in between the broken commit and the one that fixes it, and it only affects things trying to set the ioprio with a dead task. Is this a huge issue? I don't see why this would cause a lot of bisection headaches.
I was saying that my commit was polluting syzbot bisection, this is a distraction in this report. (Or if you prefer, please ignore syzbot bisection) linux-next has still this bug in set_task_ioprio()
-- Jens Axboe