-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 26
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
How UTopia generate code coverage? #31
Comments
Additionally, I have another question. Why do some fuzz driver executions result in outputs like this: root@b2e10585dfcb:/home/exp/libvpx/output/profiles# ./ByteAlignmentTest_SwitchByteAlignment_Test | less
../test/webm_video_source.h:43: Failure
Value of: vpx_ctx_->file != NULL
Actual: false
Expected: true
Input file open failed. Filename: vp90-2-02-size-lf-1920x1080.webm
../test/decode_test_driver.h:74: Failure
Expected equality of these values:
expected_value
Which is: 0
res
Which is: 8
Invalid parameter
../test/webm_video_source.h:57: Failure
Value of: vpx_ctx_->file != NULL
Actual: false
Expected: true
../test/decode_test_driver.h:74: Failure
Expected equality of these values:
expected_value
Which is: 0
res
Which is: 8
Invalid parameter
../test/webm_video_source.h:57: Failure
Value of: vpx_ctx_->file != NULL
Actual: false
Expected: true
../test/decode_test_driver.h:74: Failure
Expected equality of these values:
expected_value
Which is: 0
res
Which is: 8
Invalid parameter
../test/webm_video_source.h:57: Failure
Value of: vpx_ctx_->file != NULL
Actual: false
Expected: true Shouldn't the correct execution look like the libFuzzer output? root@b2e10585dfcb:/home/exp/libvpx/output/profiles# ./VP9_TestBitIO_Test
INFO: Seed: 2734834166
INFO: Loaded 1 modules (128229 inline 8-bit counters): 128229 [0x1a12cc0, 0x1a321a5),
INFO: Loaded 1 PC tables (128229 PCs): 128229 [0x15e6570,0x17db3c0),
INFO: -max_len is not provided; libFuzzer will not generate inputs larger than 4096 bytes
INFO: A corpus is not provided, starting from an empty corpus
#2 INITED cov: 158 ft: 159 corp: 1/1b exec/s: 0 rss: 50Mb
NEW_FUNC[1/34]: 0xcd1e50 in std::vector<unsigned char, std::allocator<unsigned char> >::size() const /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/9/../../../../include/c++/9/bits/stl_vector.h:916
NEW_FUNC[2/34]: 0x129de20 in AutoFuzz::FuzzArgsProfile::~FuzzArgsProfile() /home/exp/libvpx/test/FuzzArgsProfile.pb.cc:116
#3 NEW cov: 213 ft: 232 corp: 2/220b lim: 4096 exec/s: 0 rss: 52Mb L: 219/219 MS: 2 InsertRepeatedBytes-Custom-
#7 NEW cov: 214 ft: 245 corp: 3/366b lim: 4096 exec/s: 0 rss: 52Mb L: 146/219 MS: 6 InsertRepeatedBytes-Custom-CustomCrossOver-CustomCrossOver-InsertByte-Custom-
#9 NEW cov: 214 ft: 247 corp: 4/609b lim: 4096 exec/s: 0 rss: 52Mb L: 243/243 MS: 4 ChangeBit-Custom-CopyPart-Custom-
#11 NEW cov: 214 ft: 248 corp: 5/628b lim: 4096 exec/s: 0 rss: 52Mb L: 19/243 MS: 2 CustomCrossOver-CustomCrossOver-
#12 NEW cov: 214 ft: 249 corp: 6/666b lim: 4096 exec/s: 0 rss: 52Mb L: 38/243 MS: 1 CustomCrossOver-
#14 NEW cov: 214 ft: 251 corp: 7/942b lim: 4096 exec/s: 0 rss: 52Mb L: 276/276 MS: 3 CustomCrossOver-CrossOver-Custom-
#15 NEW cov: 214 ft: 252 corp: 8/1095b lim: 4096 exec/s: 0 rss: 52Mb L: 153/276 MS: 2 InsertRepeatedBytes-Custom-
#19 REDUCE cov: 214 ft: 252 corp: 8/1011b lim: 4096 exec/s: 0 rss: 52Mb L: 192/243 MS: 5 CustomCrossOver-ChangeBinInt-Custom-CustomCrossOver-CustomCrossOver-
#21 REDUCE cov: 214 ft: 252 corp: 8/992b lim: 4096 exec/s: 0 rss: 52Mb L: 173/243 MS: 4 ShuffleBytes-CrossOver-Custom-Custom-
#24 NEW cov: 214 ft: 271 corp: 9/1025b lim: 4096 exec/s: 0 rss: 52Mb L: 33/243 MS: 7 ChangeBit-Custom-ChangeBit-Custom-CopyPart-ChangeBinInt-Custom- I'm not sure if it's because I'm unfamiliar with libFuzzer. Apologies if this is a naive question, I'm new to fuzz testing. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Hello,
I encountered an issue while trying to reproduce evaluation
I want to check the code coverage and I'm not sure if my approach is correct.
I followed the steps below, using assimp as an example:
I executed the fuzz driver
VTAdjacencyTest_unreferencedVerticesSet_Test
to obtaindefault.profraw
cd exp/assimp/output/profiles/ ./VTAdjacencyTest_unreferencedVerticesSet_Test
The report shows that the code coverage is 0%.
I tested other projects in the same way and got the same result.
I would like to know how UTopia calculates code coverage.
Thank you for your response.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: