lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Mar]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [syzbot] Monthly io-uring report
From
On 3/27/23 1:12?PM, Aleksandr Nogikh wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 8:23?PM Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> 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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-03-27 21:21    [W:0.053 / U:0.228 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site