llvm dev - Jul 2018 - Using -runs consistently in libFuzzer tests

Timeouts when running tests are annoying,
but for many libFuzzer tests lacking -runs argument that’s an expected failure
mode.
Should we go through all the tests making sure that -runs is supplied?

Motivation: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38034

This sounds reasonable to me.  Some tests could probably use a seed as well.

On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 3:55 PM George Karpenkov <ekarpenkov at apple.com>
wrote:
> Timeouts when running tests are annoying,
> but for many libFuzzer tests lacking -runs argument that’s an expected
> failure mode.
> Should we go through all the tests making sure that -runs is supplied?
>
> Motivation: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38034
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180706/3ab5be0e/attachment.html>

Not sure. My answer would depend on a particular test.
for some tests -runs should not be required.

On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 8:57 AM Matt Morehouse <mascasa at google.com>
wrote:
> This sounds reasonable to me.  Some tests could probably use a seed as
> well.
>
> On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 3:55 PM George Karpenkov <ekarpenkov at
apple.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Timeouts when running tests are annoying,
>> but for many libFuzzer tests lacking -runs argument that’s an expected
>> failure mode.
>> Should we go through all the tests making sure that -runs is supplied?
>>
>> Motivation: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38034
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180706/88d16df5/attachment.html>