Kostya Serebryany via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes:> On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 5:51 PM, Brian Cain <brian.cain at gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 7:25 PM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote: >>> #0 READ cov 0 bits 0 units 1331 exec/s 0 >>> ... >>> #1024 pulse cov 8043 bits 13474 units 1331 exec/s 256 >>> #1331 INITED cov 8050 bits 13689 units 594 exec/s 221 >>> #2048 pulse cov 8050 bits 13689 units 594 exec/s 341 >>> >>> This means that the corpus on disk had 1331 units, they were read, >>> shuffled, executed, and those that added coverage were chosen. >> >> Hah! this means I've been misreading this line all along. My eyes zoomed >> in on "N exec/s" and I assumed that was the throughput (and I just ignored >> the "suffix" entry). So it's "cov X" / "bits Y" / "units Z" / "exec/s W" >> ? I guess the PCRE2 use case in the docs explains some of this -- I >> should've read this more closely. >> > > Yep. > Hm... Maybe I should put ":" there, like > #2048 pulse cov: 8050 bits: 13689 units: 594 exec/s: 341 > ??Please do. The ":" makes this much clearer, IMHO. It might even be worth it to throw some "," in there like #2048 pulse cov: 8050, bits: 13689, units: 594, exec/s: 341 I find the exec/s in particular looks like a unit, which makes me really want to read "594 exec/s" in the current output. Though, then I can't figure out what the 341 means, which usually clues me in.
> From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] > On Behalf Of Justin Bogner via llvm-dev > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] libfuzzer questions> Kostya Serebryany via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes: > > Hm... Maybe I should put ":" there, like > > #2048 pulse cov: 8050 bits: 13689 units: 594 exec/s: 341> Please do. The ":" makes this much clearer, IMHO. It might even be worth > it to throw some "," in there like> #2048 pulse cov: 8050, bits: 13689, units: 594, exec/s: 341I'd recommend a semicolon over a comma, since the latter might confuse European numeric scanners (thousands separator). #2048 pulse cov: 8050; bits: 13689; units: 594; exec/s: 341 - Chuck
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 4:43 AM, Caldarale, Charles R via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:> > From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] > > On Behalf Of Justin Bogner via llvm-dev > > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] libfuzzer questions > > > Kostya Serebryany via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes: > > > Hm... Maybe I should put ":" there, like > > > #2048 pulse cov: 8050 bits: 13689 units: 594 exec/s: 341 > > > Please do. The ":" makes this much clearer, IMHO. It might even be worth > > it to throw some "," in there like > > > #2048 pulse cov: 8050, bits: 13689, units: 594, exec/s: 341 > > I'd recommend a semicolon over a comma, since the latter might confuse > European numeric scanners (thousands separator). > > I've added ":" yesterday.Comma will add more stuff in there an complicate tiny awk-like scripts that one may use to look at the logs.> #2048 pulse cov: 8050; bits: 13689; units: 594; exec/s: 341 > > - Chuck > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20150812/3bd7ee2a/attachment.html>