Re: [syzbot] [kvm?] [net?] [virt?] general protection fault in vhost_work_queue

[Mike Christie]

On 5/30/23 11:00 AM, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> I think it is partially related to commit 6e890c5d5021 ("vhost: use
> vhost_tasks for worker threads") and commit 1a5f8090c6de ("vhost: move
> worker thread fields to new struct"). Maybe that commits just
> highlighted the issue and it was already existing.

See my mail about the crash. Agree with your analysis about worker->vtsk
not being set yet. It's a bug from my commit where I should have not set
it so early or I should be checking for

if (dev->worker && worker->vtsk)

instead of 

if (dev->worker)

One question about the behavior before my commit though and what we want in
the end going forward. Before that patch we would just drop work if
vhost_work_queue was called before VHOST_SET_OWNER. Was that correct/expected?

The call to vhost_work_queue in vhost_vsock_start was only seeing the
works queued after VHOST_SET_OWNER. Did you want works queued before that?