Closed kdsjZh closed 7 months ago
/gcbrun run_experiment.py -a --experiment-config /opt/fuzzbench/service/experiment-config.yaml --experiment-name 2024-01-24-aflpp-sk --fuzzers aflplusplus_sk aflplusplus_sk_near aflplusplus
I forgot to add aflpp_sk in the commit, so it failed. Could you run the command again @vanhauser-thc
/gcbrun run_experiment.py -a --experiment-config /opt/fuzzbench/service/experiment-config.yaml --experiment-name 2024-01-24-aflpp-sk2 --fuzzers aflplusplus_sk aflplusplus_sk_near aflplusplus
@kdsjZh I think you have to fix the CI first
Hi, I figure out that I test CI on another branch, which only have sk/sk_near. On this branch the existing ff variants failed the CI test. The aflpp_sk is fine with CI. I removed them, now it passed the local CI test and should work.
BTW, looks like the evaluation is running (building are successful, ), so we might don't need to start a new one.
/gcbrun run_experiment.py -a --experiment-config /opt/fuzzbench/service/experiment-config.yaml --experiment-name 2024-01-26-aflpp-sk --fuzzers aflplusplus_sk aflplusplus
Hi dongge,
@Alan32Liu I developed a variant of FishFuzz (USENIX Security23) to make it compatible with fuzzbench (the original version in the paper rely on LTO mode, which fails/timeout on loots of fuzzbench targets), and I would like to request an evaluation to see if it works. Could you help me run the fuzzer
aflplusplus_ff_cmp
,aflplusplus_fishfuzz
andaflplusplus_fishfuzz_allbb
?Thanks! Han