On Mon, 2017-10-30 at 18:40 +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: > On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 6:30 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.duma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, 2017-10-30 at 18:06 +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: > > > >> Yes, but hashes in random trees also don't tell much. A tree can be > >> rebased so the hash will be lost. It can be a tree unknown to the > >> system. Even if we find the commit by hash, in order to match it > >> against other trees we will have to use the title anyway (or are there > >> better options?), so using hashes becomes pointless. > > > > We do not send hashes on random trees, but official SHA1 in David Miller > > trees. They will be the same SHA1 in official Linus Torvalds tree. > > > > Really, you make our life more difficult by pretending that hashes are > > not the proper way. > > > > They are reasons we use Fixes: tags all over the places, they are unique > > in Linus tree. > > > > Since syzbot gives a SHA1 itself, it must be using a tree, right ? > > > > So a SHA1 that is guaranteed to enter the same tree is correct. > > > > Please fix your bot. > > > They don't necessary enter the same tree (that's more of an exception > than the rule). For bugs that we find in Linus tree, fixes enter usb, > kvm, block, sound, linux-next and a bunch of other trees that I never > heard of. At the very least we will need a git repo address + commit > hash. But then for say linux-next hashes disappear. And mm which is > not a git tree at all (no hashes). > And still the hashes will need to be explicitly marked as fixes (with > #syz fix or something else). So that would look like: > ##syz fix: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mhocko/mm.git > e7989f973ae1b90ec7c0b671c81f7f553affccbe > which does not look much better than: > ##syz fix: tun: do not arm flow_gc_timer in tun_flow_init() > which also I think makes it easier for humans to ensure that they > actually reference what they meant to reference (and maybe find the > fix in other trees).
I suggested that syzbot catches up on standard way : <SHA1> patch title It contains way more information than : sys fix: patch title I never suggested to only use <SHA1>
