Skip to content

Change spectest fuzzing to throw out some fuzz inputs#5597

Merged
alexcrichton merged 1 commit intobytecodealliance:mainfrom
alexcrichton:fix-fuzz
Jan 19, 2023
Merged

Change spectest fuzzing to throw out some fuzz inputs#5597
alexcrichton merged 1 commit intobytecodealliance:mainfrom
alexcrichton:fix-fuzz

Conversation

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

A fuzz bug came in last night from #5567 where spectest fuzzing will first generate a config, possibly with SSE features for SIMD disabled, only to have SIMD later enabled by set_spectest_compliant. This commit fixes the issue by changing to is_spectest_compliant as a query and throwing out the fuzz case if it isn't. This means that the spectest fuzzer will throw out more inputs but means we can continue to generate interesting configs and such for other inputs.

A fuzz bug came in last night from bytecodealliance#5567 where spectest fuzzing will
first generate a config, possibly with SSE features for SIMD disabled,
only to have SIMD later enabled by `set_spectest_compliant`. This commit
fixes the issue by changing to `is_spectest_compliant` as a query and
throwing out the fuzz case if it isn't. This means that the spectest
fuzzer will throw out more inputs but means we can continue to generate
interesting configs and such for other inputs.
@github-actions github-actions bot added the fuzzing Issues related to our fuzzing infrastructure label Jan 19, 2023
@github-actions
Copy link

Subscribe to Label Action

cc @fitzgen

Details This issue or pull request has been labeled: "fuzzing"

Thus the following users have been cc'd because of the following labels:

  • fitzgen: fuzzing

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this label, edit the .github/subscribe-to-label.json configuration file.

Learn more.

Copy link
Member

@abrown abrown left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What does the "throw out" rate end up being with this change? (If you have it handy...)

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member Author

Ah sorry no I don't have the rate for this, but historically libfuzzer has done well with this sort of strategy since the coverage information quickly shows inputs that don't get past this check.

@alexcrichton alexcrichton merged commit 1f534c5 into bytecodealliance:main Jan 19, 2023
@alexcrichton alexcrichton deleted the fix-fuzz branch January 19, 2023 18:48
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

fuzzing Issues related to our fuzzing infrastructure

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants