Re: [syzbot] [usb?] general protection fault in vhci_hcd_probe

[Aleksandr Nogikh]

On Mon, Sep 7, 2026 at 10:22 AM Michal Pecio <michal.pecio@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 7 Sep 2026 09:59:36 +0200, Aleksandr Nogikh wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 6, 2026 at 12:38 PM Michal Pecio <michal.pecio@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, 5 Sep 2026 13:30:01 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
< .. >

> > > >
> > > > That will taint the kernel in newer releases, and syzbot has already
> > > > been told not to do this, it's not "valid" at all.
> > >
> > > What cought my attention is that Google apparently has some capability
> > > (human, machine or otherwise) to understand how this repro works, and
> > > yet they keep reporting this broken pattern.
> >
> > As Greg pointed out, we've adjusted the fuzzer to stop using this
> > kernel interface, so there should be no new bugs of this type.
> > However, we haven't yet invalidated all such reported bugs, so some
> > notifications like this one may still leak. I'll look into
> > mass-invalidation of them all, but in the meanwhile let's close this
> > particular one:
> >
> > #syz invalid
>
> Thanks, that should do it.
>
> Nota bene, this can be triggered not only by the per-device
> 'driver_override' files, but also the per-driver 'new_id'. While
> I haven't yet seen your syzbot instance using the latter, I have
> seen others, so this needs to be filtered too.

Thanks for the suggestion!
I've looked through the open bugs, and none of them seems to be using
new_id indeed, but I've sent a fix to prohibit that just in case:
https://github.com/google/syzkaller/pull/7888.

Please feel free to ping us if you notice any similar false positives.

-- 
Aleksandr

>
> Regards,
> Michal