similar to: Adding a decoder fuzz target

Thanks for your comments, Ralph and Jean-Marc. Please find attached the amended patch: - decodes a sequence of input packets rather than just one (I'm planning on using the Opus test vectors as the seed corpus) - decides on decoder setup and FEC independently of the packet data - uses Opus functions to parse ToC Cheers, Felicia On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 9:48 PM Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin at

Hi Felicia, Overall the patch looks good to me and it's a pretty reasonable starting points. Some minor comments below. On 10/02/17 02:44 PM, Felicia Lim wrote: > - decodes a sequence of input packets rather than just one (I'm planning > on using the Opus test vectors as the seed corpus) I remember from experimenting with AFL that it didn't like the test vectors because they

Hi Felicia, Here's a few comments/questions on your patch: > static void ParseToc(const uint8_t toc, TocInfo *const info) { Any particular reason you don't use the Opus functions for parsing the ToC? It seems like opus_packet_get_nb_samples(), opus_packet_get_bandwidth(), and opus_packet_get_nb_channels() should do the trick. > int LLVMFuzzerTestOneInput(const uint8_t *data,

Hi Mitch, Thank you for the response. 1. You don't need to build the library with `-fsanitize-coverage=...`, using `-fsanitize=fuzzer-no-link,address` should be sufficient. - Acknowledged 2. (although you can actually build object files/shared libraries with -fsanitize=fuzzer, and the libFuzzer main won't be linked, if this makes your build process easier). - with just the *fuzzer

I am working of using libfuzzer and asan to test out a third-party library. As demonstrated in the tutorial, I wrote a fuzz target to fuzz a specific function in the library. The fuzz target is then linked to the library and compiles clean and I do see some tests generated by the fuzzer. However, I have some questions regarding the "right" way to go about doing this. I have doubts that

Hi, As a part of a recent move of libFuzzer from LLVM to compiler-rt I am looking into updating the build code for the libraries which use libFuzzer. I have tried to compile llvm-mc-assemble-fuzzer, and llvm-mc-disassemble-fuzzer, and I couldn’t build either of those. For the first one, the reason is that it refers to a nonexistent enum, and for the second one I believe the reason is that it

On 06/01/2016 02:06 PM, Felicia Lim wrote: > That was my intention with refactoring out the subframe encoding and > repacketizing bit. Or do you mean I should merge the explicit check for > 120 ms frame and the existing checks for 40/60 ms wideband? What I mean is that this line in opus_encoder.c: if (frame_size > st->Fs/50 && (st->mode == MODE_CELT_ONLY ||

Hi, I wondered if are there any further thoughts on these patches? Thanks, Felicia On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 2:13 PM Felicia Lim <flim at google.com> wrote: > OK, I've amended the second patch and also added 80 and 100 ms. > > Thanks, > Felicia > > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 7:20 AM Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin at jmvalin.ca> wrote: > >> On 06/01/2016 02:06

Hi, Attached is a patch with arm neon optimizations for silk_warped_autocorrelation_FIX(). Please review. Thanks, Felicia -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/opus/attachments/20170131/9a912bb4/attachment-0001.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name:

Attached is the amended second patch. It now extends the multistream API as well to 80/100/120 ms and incorporates changes based on Mark's comments. Thanks, Felicia On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 4:21 PM Felicia Lim <flim at google.com> wrote: > Hi Mark, Jean-Marc, > > Thanks for your comments. > > On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 6:34 AM Mark Harris <mark.hsj at gmail.com>

Hi Felicia, A few comments: > - /* CELT can only support up to 20 ms */ > subframe_size = st->Fs/50; > - nb_subframes = frame_size > st->Fs/25 ? 3 : 2; > + nb_subframes = frame_size/subframe_size; This will use six 20ms frames to make a 120ms packet, even for SILK-only mode where frames can be up to 60ms. For SILK, two 60ms frames would be a more

I'd like to discuss the following change: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37526 For the context, there is a comment in compiler-rt/lib/fuzzer/FuzzerExtFunctionsWeak.cpp: // Implementation for Linux. This relies on the linker's support for weak // symbols. We don't use this approach on Apple platforms because it requires // clients of LibFuzzer to pass ``-U _<symbol_name>`` to the

Hi all, We (WebRTC/Google) would like to extend Opus to natively support 120 ms encoding instead of relying on repacketization as a post processing step. This is to ensure that a valid 120 ms packet is always available. I've attached a couple of patches to add this to opus_encoder(), based on the internal repacketization process carried out by 60 ms CELT. We intend to extend this later for

I have a project I want to do based on Libfuzzer. Is there a separate list for it or should I bring up any ideas for it here? What I have in mind is to fuzz Postgres. Trying to fuzz the SQL interpreter in general is not very productive because traditional fuzzers try to execute the entire program repeatedly and it has a fairly high startup and shutdown cost. Also the instrumentation-guided

Hi Ulrich, thanks for the suggestion. My concern is that one of the valid inputs is "2.5", which would require conversion to an int, e.g. x10, but doing something like this would start to affect the code readability. On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 3:02 PM Ulrich Windl < Ulrich.Windl at rz.uni-regensburg.de> wrote: > Hi! > > A note on style: Looking at this chunk of the patch

Hi. I made a webrtc relay with recording and dumped the SDP requests and RTP packets into files. Then I made a java decoder based on jitsi. Although the files contain all the needed info: encription keys, codec info, timestamps, etc., I could only decode one side in one of 2 conversations. For example, the RTP payload is decrypted successfully, but opus_packet_get_nb_samples() or opus_decode()

Hi, Please find attached a patch to fix alignment exceptions. Without this change, we were seeing occasional alignment faults when using this with clang. Thanks, Felicia -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/opus/attachments/20170818/e0d6bb06/attachment.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text

We see the MOVQ instruction but this patch deliberately uses it rather than MOVQDA (load 128-bits aligned). We were seeing that with the trace below, the final invocation is not 128-bit aligned but MOVQDA insists on it (the calling function was pitch_sse4_1.c:90, in the 4-way N - i >= 4 loop). 07-31 11:00:13.469 210 2540 <(469)%20210-2540> D opus_sse1: RBE celt_inner_prod_sse4_1: x

Hi Felicia, I still don't quite understand why you need to make 120 ms a special case, rather than extend the code that already handles 40 ms and 60 ms. Cheers, Jean-Marc On 06/01/2016 12:58 PM, Felicia Lim wrote: > Hi all, > > I've just realized that there's a better and simpler way of doing this > which ensures that analysis and selection of the mode/bandwidth etc

On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 3:35 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> > wrote: > >> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kostya Serebryany via llvm-dev < >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 3:20