Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork937
Replace the Suboptimalfuzz_tree.py
Harness With a Better Alternative#1910
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account
Replace the Suboptimalfuzz_tree.py
Harness With a Better Alternative#1910
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Conversation
As discussed in the initial fuzzing integration PR[^1], `fuzz_tree.py`'simplementation was not ideal in terms of coverage and its reading/writing tohard-coded paths inside `/tmp` was problematic as (among other concerns), itcauses intermittent crashes on ClusterFuzz[^2] when multiple workers executethe test at the same time on the same machine.The changes here replace `fuzz_tree.py` completely with a completely new`fuzz_repo.py` fuzz target which:- Uses `tempfile.TemporaryDirectory()` to safely manage tmpdir creation and tear down, including during multi-worker execution runs.- Retains the same feature coverage as `fuzz_tree.py`, but it also adds considerably more from much smaller data inputs and with less memory consumed (and it doesn't even have a seed corpus or target specific dictionary yet.)- Can likely be improved further in the future by exercising additional features of `Repo` to the harness.Because `fuzz_tree.py` was removed and `fuzz_repo.py` was not derived from it,the Apache License call outs in the docs were also updated as they only apply tothe singe `fuzz_config.py` file now.[^1]:gitpython-developers#1901 (comment)[^2]:https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=68355
and FWIW, if removing |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.
Thanks a million!
More efficient fuzzing is great!
5f26779
intogitpython-developers:mainUh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
As discussed in the initial fuzzing integration PR1,
fuzz_tree.py
's implementation was not ideal in terms of coverage and its reading/writing to hard-coded paths inside/tmp
was problematic as (among other concerns), it causes intermittent crashes on ClusterFuzz2 when multiple workers execute the test at the same time on the same machine.The changes here replace
fuzz_tree.py
completely with a completely newfuzz_repo.py
fuzz target which:tempfile.TemporaryDirectory()
to safely manage tmpdir creation and tear down, including during multi-worker execution runs.fuzz_tree.py
, but it also adds considerably more from much smaller data inputs and with less memory consumed (and it doesn't even have a seed corpus or target specific dictionary yet.)Repo
to the harness.Here are some very rough stats to give a very rough idea of the difference:
fuzz_repo.py
(my local testing)fuzz_tree.py
(most recent successful CF run)Note on License
Because
fuzz_tree.py
was removed andfuzz_repo.py
was not derived from it, the Apache License call outs in the docs were also updated as they only apply to the singefuzz_config.py
file now.Footnotes
https://github.com/gitpython-developers/GitPython/pull/1901#discussion_r1565001609↩
https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=68355↩