Skip to content
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

Add EXPLICIT fork policy #2514

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Jan 4, 2022
Merged

Add EXPLICIT fork policy #2514

merged 7 commits into from
Jan 4, 2022

Conversation

Boyan-MILANOV
Copy link
Contributor

Add a new fork policy called "EXPLICIT" that allows to specify arbitrary concrete values for the expression on whom we are forking.

@Boyan-MILANOV Boyan-MILANOV marked this pull request as ready for review December 17, 2021 10:57
manticore/core/state.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
manticore/core/state.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@ekilmer ekilmer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Minor changes for more type hints. (Might break formatting lint when applying the suggestions from GitHub).

manticore/core/manticore.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
manticore/core/state.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
manticore/core/state.py Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@ekilmer ekilmer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you! LGTM.

@ekilmer ekilmer merged commit b050fdf into master Jan 4, 2022
@ekilmer ekilmer deleted the custom-concretization-policy branch January 4, 2022 14:26
Boyan-MILANOV added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 4, 2022
Add a new fork policy called "EXPLICIT" that allows to specify arbitrary concrete values for the expression on whom we are forking.

* Add EXPLICIT fork policy allowing to provide our own concrete values

* Add feasibility checks for the EXPLICIT concretisation policy

* Add few type hints

* Don't pass kwargs to BaseException

* Only use lists in StateBase.concretize()
ekilmer added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 3, 2022
* master: (35 commits)
  Switch to stable Black (#2536)
  Fix typo in Manticore.linux constructor docstring (#2535)
  Revert CI changes made in #2526
  Release Manticore 0.3.7 (#2526)
  Optimise forking when there is only 1 solution (#2527)
  Epoll Implementation (#2529)
  Split off ENDBR32/64 from CHESS branch (#2533)
  Update to crytic-compile 0.2.2 (#2530)
  Also ignore missing unicorn registers in the fallback emulator (#2531)
  x86 FXSAVE & FXRSTOR support (#2511)
  Fix `BitVecExtract` simplification for constant folding (#2524)
  Add pip-audit action workflow (#2513)
  Add EXPLICIT fork policy (#2514)
  Enforce crytic-compile==0.2.1 (#2512)
  Improve namedtuple definition (#2506)
  Add SMT simplifications for bitvec subtraction (#2504)
  Fix handling of the program base address in Linux (#2500)
  Bump Sphinx version to 4.3.0 (#2503)
  Solver Improvements (#2502)
  Improves `namedtuple` definition (#2501)
  ...
ekilmer added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 21, 2022
* master:
  Switch to stable Black (#2536)
  Fix typo in Manticore.linux constructor docstring (#2535)
  Revert CI changes made in #2526
  Release Manticore 0.3.7 (#2526)
  Optimise forking when there is only 1 solution (#2527)
  Epoll Implementation (#2529)
  Split off ENDBR32/64 from CHESS branch (#2533)
  Update to crytic-compile 0.2.2 (#2530)
  Also ignore missing unicorn registers in the fallback emulator (#2531)
  x86 FXSAVE & FXRSTOR support (#2511)
  Fix `BitVecExtract` simplification for constant folding (#2524)
  Add pip-audit action workflow (#2513)
  Add EXPLICIT fork policy (#2514)
  Enforce crytic-compile==0.2.1 (#2512)
  Improve namedtuple definition (#2506)
  Add SMT simplifications for bitvec subtraction (#2504)
  Fix handling of the program base address in Linux (#2500)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants