- User Since
- Oct 3 2012, 4:55 AM (301 w, 6 d)
err... partially taking my word back.. I do want to keep this test to use STL.
Instead of this change, please create another test, e.g. SimpleTestStdio.cpp, that won't use STL, and use the new test in msan runs.
I'd prefer to not have this functionality in lsan -- it already has __lsan_do_recoverable_leak_check which should be sufficient for a user to implement this functionality on their side.
(If not, that may need to be fixed).
Matt, please test locally and land.
Maybe just change the msan-ish test to not use STL
Thu, Jul 12
Tue, Jul 10
It it bothers someone, we can turn this function into a non-recursive by implementing a fixed-size queue (array of 2^16 shorts).
Or you can run the ExplodeDFSanLabelsTestDF with a large value of "ulimit -s".
Mon, Jul 9
yea, you are right, you can't directly use F->RunningCB if you don't have F visible.
But I don't want to have two copies of this flag, one in Fuzzer and one in TracePC.
Please also update the docs (http://llvm.org/docs/LibFuzzer.html) once we are confident that msan+libfuzzer works out of the box
Matt, please land it
Fri, Jul 6
sure, I can commit (done). thanks!
Tue, Jul 3
even just having the literal constant "-ignore_remaining_args=1" in two places is fine.
option two or some flavor of it would be much more preferable.
Maybe just declare a global constant kIgnoreRemaining above the definition of 'class Command' (inside the fuzzer namespace)
errr... I'd prefer not to...
do you know why this happens?
Mon, Jul 2
a couple of nits, then good to go.
Why is it safe to remove ScopedDoingMyOwnMemOrStr from the places you've removed it from?
You may try projects/compiler-rt/lib/sanitizer_common/scripts/sancov.py instead of sancov, this tool is less restrictive.
pipe the output of sancov.py through llvm-symbolizer
Fri, Jun 29
add a .lit test, please
the current patch is hard to review as it contains tons of formatting (or otherwise unrelated) fixed.
Plz don't mix formatting/refactoring with meaningful changes in one patch.
Wed, Jun 27
Hm... I thought this is intentional -- I do want to test libFuzzer with O2 by default.
same with ShrinkControlFlowTest. I've run it 10000 times.
>> 10^6 iterations already take ~20 seconds, would be hesitant to bump it more.
Any sources of non-determinism you suspect?
oh, anything could be different. I wouldn't expect seed=1 to behave the same on different platforms.
Need to check why this test is flaky (too few iterations?)
Tue, Jun 26
Mon, Jun 25
Please watch the bots -- I can imagine it can fail in lots of ways.
Jun 7 2018
Some feedback on the generated code:
is this testable (somewhere in test/fuzzer/afl-driver*)?
what's the process for getting this landed from here?
Jun 6 2018
Matt, please make the first pass.
Jun 5 2018
are tests possible here?
Jun 1 2018
May 31 2018
May 30 2018
May 23 2018
For data flow test, make sure to rebuild dfsan (ninja check-dfsan)
Yes, I think a much safer fix would be to add
unsigned struct_ustat_sz = <SOMETHING>; // glibc >= 2.28 doesn't have <sys/ustat.h> so we can't include it and use sizeof(struct ustat);
the ustat interceptor has been added in 2013, probably as part of the work on msan.
May 22 2018
May 21 2018
Is this code review stuck?
May 18 2018
May 16 2018
Looking forward to trying to attack it.
But indeed, for examples like this, KLEE (or other symexec) is clearly more powerful... today.
May 15 2018