-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 275
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 our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
libafl_libfuzzer optimization experiment #1903
Conversation
402ce53
to
3060a52
Compare
having some linkage issues |
47223ec
to
79256a9
Compare
Found an issue with one of our recent optimisations. Marked as draft until it's fixed up. |
297871f
to
04a773e
Compare
Good to go! Hunted down all the bugs with the recent optimisations (that I'm aware of... 💀) libafl_libfuzzer is not affected by the issue identified in #1902 because we don't use libafl_cc, so this is good to go whenever y'all are ready to fire the experiment. |
Rebased on the libafl updates used in #1902 for sanity. |
Hi @addisoncrump, is this ready for experiments? If so, would you mind making a trivial modification to service/gcbrun_experiment.py? In addition, could you please write your experiment request in this format? For example, I reckon the command for this case is:
Where FuzzBench will reuse existing results of |
We have a couple of more changes in the queue ready, so I'll send this in in a bit 🙂 |
this is ready with all the pr merged? @addisoncrump |
Yup, let me update the commit |
All of the relevant libafl changes landed, so I removed libfuzzer_best. For now, this is good to go ✔️ Let's compare:
Thanks! |
Well, that didn't work. Coming back to this in the morning. |
Superceded by other recent PRs. |
We made some heavy optimisations and new features that we'd like to test. Can an experiment be run for:
libafl (depends on Update LibAFL #1902; temporarily rebased)please skip while we remediatelibafl_cc
Thanks!