From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sipsolutions.net (s3.sipsolutions.net [168.119.38.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D0635246762; Sat, 3 Jan 2026 13:05:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1767445529; cv=none; b=jcY/SPaGGDm8ylIhpf9gYva+s9Pklj+SDbfIl/w6UHFR//0MUW/EphRQudEHYdWTrEQW7zeWwLU165uu0kV0avEuL9r9MSFKkCPJWedriYG5vRzZWbGiNyTVhD1WoIrfnQZISiuZnj8jdDr/b8S9f5qv00bJjrpU6cTX628uksk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1767445529; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ljhVWlyIzpcsTEWCqtSJLtuxw6WH53rf4m2/VigWrdw=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=mRVokD6MkgJ7eECm8zVskR041fUqHPfP+BDn3FWFlr5+jTiRnfrfvbvdMSKEk2N0GQyNZ12SyPkXxPNA+gxswikf3tgSEttvF3IbOAqY74YlogXpjR4jCYq1XuoHqAfmuvJY3QrNQVDJjOB/2NJSn8KGimaQ/RA5N+uUF+WWsGg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b=QblgN0iW; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b="QblgN0iW" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sipsolutions.net; s=mail; h=MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:References:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID; bh=ljhVWlyIzpcsTEWCqtSJLtuxw6WH53rf4m2/VigWrdw=; t=1767445527; x=1768655127; b=QblgN0iW73bDkWa22VRbfapK86CrjlvTuLTuUWAutWX4dUO b6VrpCuvUCuqajyZioLVE2s1sJfH1m55TGwh8k9czuFCtuoibkx/VXoavGIimvM1agNRskMId4v9f hJq5SFP/xP9Gcp/rO5lvV9EKFsXHKA7stg9mqwV+G8TC/ZjPZrinWQTjivLJXTGWzQoXnvyl8z7em 8MRJvLjguCWuAWrtQTAaVeFR9JcxC5lNS3umD2xdq9L7gU7ba7VvJ39kF/CAPWkC73Lp1yJu7J4GY X+bF0lQTf3CJq6dpO6P634R/jd7YbN+16bTcl8GwgKizpCxEGnBUaQ8I8A2us0rg==; Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.98.2) (envelope-from ) id 1vc1Jn-00000002A78-04GT; Sat, 03 Jan 2026 14:05:19 +0100 Message-ID: <13bd5c0903fef7d27b4af2a2e43e92a380f71968.camel@sipsolutions.net> Subject: Re: [syzbot] [wireless?] WARNING in rfkill_unregister From: Johannes Berg To: Aleksandr Nogikh Cc: syzbot , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com, Krzysztof Kozlowski Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2026 14:05:18 +0100 In-Reply-To: (sfid-20260102_230310_438801_8E58F90B) References: <6955cbd5.050a0220.a1b6.032d.GAE@google.com> (sfid-20260102_230310_438801_8E58F90B) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.56.2 (3.56.2-2.fc42) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-malware-bazaar: not-scanned On Fri, 2026-01-02 at 23:02 +0100, Aleksandr Nogikh wrote: >=20 > It depends on the particular case. It should be fairly easy to do for > warnings (where there's just one clear stack trace) and potentially > very tricky for task hungs (e.g. > https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=3Def8f802abdb9a32343fc). Makes sense. I see now that there was a recent attempt to fix this NFC vs. rfkill deadlock issue (and this report is on a kernel before it), so I guess let's leave it and see what happens :) johannes