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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200408014010.80428-1-peterx@redhat.com> <20200408174732.bc448bbe41d190bfe5cc252e@linux-foundation.org>
 <20200409114940.GT21484@bombadil.infradead.org> <CACT4Y+ZvQ9UvVAwTjjD8Zxo0X_nfxa3+6n6TqWk2g+hahBwdCw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200409111604.c778ff091c00fab5db095e48@linux-foundation.org>
 <CAHk-=wiU77DeNxQsU4XrDCk59asyTs=Hn+mnTx6-SHB1_fA2NQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200409121250.d6bba6965b86c8dfcf325fbc@linux-foundation.org>
 <CAHk-=wgy3XRiyRP7vdfF6bHwWGaB1RwyWJmyphh+Q3qYk6w27w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200409195633.GZ21484@bombadil.infradead.org> <CAHk-=wi50jKXOFpsRkxrqu4upNnEKm1oRZ_SG1yJB9QVh=VJZQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200409202751.GA7976@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20200409202751.GA7976@gmail.com>
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Thu, 9 Apr 2020 13:34:18 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wj64Uw1O9-f=XYCraLgbqBqqBHSdyO1JG80smvC-01Nug@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] mm: Two small fixes for recent syzbot reports
To:     Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
Cc:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
        Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        syzkaller-bugs <syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 1:27 PM Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Would it help if bugs blocking testing on linux-next were Cc'ed to
> linux-next@vger.kernel.org, so that Stephen could investigate?

Maybe. I'll let Stephen say.

But I think the big issue is the "blocking testing" part.

If it's "just" regular bugs, then:

> FWIW, the issue of "syzbot report sent and ignored for months/years" is actually
> a much broader one which applies to all bugs, not just build / test breakages.

I don't  know what to do about that, but it may be that people just
don't judge the bugs interesting or assume that they are old.

That's what made bugzilla so useless - being flooded with stale bugs
that might not be worth worrying about, and no way to really tell.

So old bugs generally should be aged out, and then if they still
happen, prioritized. With "this keeps us from even finding new bugs"
being a fairly high priority..

One de-motivational issue with syzbot reported bugs may be that they
sometimes get sent to the wrong set of people - but still wide enough
that everybody feels it's somebody elses issue. A kind of bystander
effect for bugs.

                Linus