Re: [syzbot] kernel BUG in assertfail
From: Nikolay Borisov <hidden>
Date: 2021-05-31 08:57:43
Also in:
lkml
On 31.05.21 г. 11:55, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 10:44 AM 'Nikolay Borisov' via syzkaller-bugs [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On 31.05.21 г. 10:53, syzbot wrote:quoted
Hello, syzbot found the following issue on: HEAD commit: 1434a312 Merge branch 'for-5.13-fixes' of git://git.kernel.. git tree: upstream console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=162843f3d00000 kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=9f3da44a01882e99 dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=a6bf271c02e4fe66b4e4 Unfortunately, I don't have any reproducer for this issue yet. IMPORTANT: if you fix the issue, please add the following tag to the commit: Reported-by: syzbot+a6bf271c02e4fe66b4e4@syzkaller.appspotmail.com assertion failed: !memcmp(fs_info->fs_devices->fsid, fs_info->super_copy->fsid, BTRFS_FSID_SIZE), in fs/btrfs/disk-io.c:3282This means a device contains a btrfs filesystem which has a different FSID in its superblock than the fsid which all devices part of the same fs_devices should have. This can happen in 2 ways - memory corruption where either of the ->fsid member are corrupted or if there was a crash while a filesystem's fsid was being changed. We need more context about what the test did?Hi Nikolay, From a semantic point of view we can consider that it just mounts /dev/random. If syzbot comes up with a reproducer it will post it, but you seem to already figure out what happened, so I assume you can write a unit test for this.
Well no, under normal circumstances this shouldn't trigger. So if syzbot is doing something stupid as mounting /dev/random then I don't see a problem here. The assert is there to catch inconsistencies during normal operation which doesn't seem to be the case here.