search for: 2bassertions

.... However, the actual bot [2] only tests the >> fuzzer itself over a well-known set of bugs in standard software (eg. >> Heartbleed [3] seems to be among them). > > Isn’t it this stage? http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/sanitizer-x86_64-linux-fuzzer/builds/2755/steps/stage2%2Fasan%2Bassertions%20check-fuzzer/logs/stdio To me it looks like just the compilation and the unit+regression tests ("ninja check-fuzzer", not even depending on clang). It also completes in only 10 minutes, which is not a lot for fuzzing. Michael

Hi all, The blog entry [1] suggest that one of the buildbots constantly fuzzes clang and clang-format. However, the actual bot [2] only tests the fuzzer itself over a well-known set of bugs in standard software (eg. Heartbleed [3] seems to be among them). Has there actually ever been a buildbot that fuzzes clang/LLVM itself? Another (obvious?) fuzzing candidate would be the LLVM's bitcode

...actual bot [2] only tests the > > fuzzer itself over a well-known set of bugs in standard software (eg. > > Heartbleed [3] seems to be among them). > > Isn’t it this stage? http://lab.llvm.org:8011/build > ers/sanitizer-x86_64-linux-fuzzer/builds/2755/steps/ > stage2%2Fasan%2Bassertions%20check-fuzzer/logs/stdio > > > Has there actually ever been a > > buildbot that fuzzes clang/LLVM itself? > Yes, I used to run clang-fuzzer and clang-format-fuzzer on this bot, but not any more. The reason is simple -- the bot was always red (well, orange) and the bugs were neve...