Re: [clear_page] 0ad07c8104 BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 0000000000000040

[Fengguang Wu]

Hi Borislav,

On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 02:50:19PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 09:06:51AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > Yes if we add it as a line below the branch URL, it could be a time saver.
>
> Right.
>
> > Since it's hard to teach ALL people about the rule, it'd be best if we
> > can work w/o any rules -- unless you want to be accurate&helpful or to
> > customize test behaviors.
> >
> > Since we already tested the original patch/commit (hence the report),
> > we should know where the fixup should be applied to. And it'd be
> > reasonably easy to tell whether the fix is incremental or a
> > replacement -- just try git-am onto the original commit first, if
> > failed, continue to try the parent commit. For old bugs the fix could
> > be against linus/master or linux-next/master, which could be tried too.
>
> Makes sense.
>
> > Yes, that'd be most convenient. In general the email interface could
> > be something like this:
> >
> >        # "key: value" fields; if you Re: to an earlier bug report, they can be auto retrieved
> >        compiler: gcc-6 # optional
> >        base-commit: v4.10-rc8 # the robot knows kernel commits from hundreds of public git trees
> >        ---
> >        the patch
> >        ---
> >        attach kconfig files
>
> Yap, just stick those rules somewhere on a website.

OK, will do when the feature is ready. According to Xiaolong, the
automated test-of-fixup-patches feature is already in our plan.

For introductions of the now-working build/boot test services and
instructions on customization, we could probably add some markdown
document under

       https://github.com/fengguang/lkp-tests/tree/master/doc

Philip/Ying, what do you think? I can draft it.

> Btw, this is not only useful for a follow-on, fix patch but also for
> initial test request. For example, I want to backport patch to stable
> and would like to run it on a bunch of kernels:
>
> base-commit: v4.4-stable, v4.9-stable, ...
>
> i.e., a list of trees to apply it to. I believe people might like this a
> lot.
>
> Or, for example, a patch touching a bunch of arches and author doesn't
> necessarily have access to all those different toolchains. Shoot a mail
> to the 0day bot:
>
> base-commit: linus/master
> arch: x86_64, powerpc, sparc, ...
>
> Would be very useful too.

We actually already test LKML patch in that way (Xiaolong maintains
this feature). Nevertheless if developers specify "base-commit:" it
could help eliminate the guessing works by the dumb robot. We'll
appreciate if the "base-commit:" or "base-patchid:" tags are listed
in the patches, especially in some non-obvious situations.

Such tags could be regarded as "explicit" test requests, where we could
send "BUILD COMPLETE" emails as a response (comparing to our normal
LKML patch tests, which only build regressions will trigger an email
notification).

> Anyway, just a couple of ideas.
>
> What would also be cool if you guys had a 0day bot howto with all those
> things we should pay attention to and we can go and look up.

OK. Your ideas are very welcome, thanks!

Regards,
Fengguang