George Karpenkov via llvm-dev
2018-Jul-05 22:55 UTC
[llvm-dev] 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
Matt Morehouse via llvm-dev
2018-Jul-06 15:56 UTC
[llvm-dev] Using -runs consistently in libFuzzer tests
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>
Kostya Serebryany via llvm-dev
2018-Jul-06 16:31 UTC
[llvm-dev] Using -runs consistently in libFuzzer tests
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>