Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 13 Dec 2019 14:51:33 -0500 (EST)
From:   Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
To:     Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>
cc:     syzbot <syzbot+7fa38a608b1075dfd634@syzkaller.appspotmail.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        USB list <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>, <mans@mansr.com>,
        syzkaller-bugs <syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Re: general protection fault in usb_set_interface
In-Reply-To: <CAAeHK+xSWEFUA7DQyhm90uiwggx60gYa8q7QqzOWp7DX_xWSWg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1912131448080.1332-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 13 Dec 2019, Andrey Konovalov wrote:

> > > Let's retry here:
> >
> > > #syz test: https://github.com/google/kasan.git f0df5c1b
> >
> > This bug is already marked as fixed. No point in testing.
> >
> 
> Hm, that explains some of the weirdness. It doesn't explain though
> neither why the patch was actually tested when Alan requested it nor
> why syzbot sent no reply.

In the meantime, is there any way to get syzbot to test the new patch
with the old reproducer?  Perhaps tell it to re-open this bug?

Alan Stern