Open jhkim19940830 opened 1 year ago
Thanks for your pull request! It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA).
View this failed invocation of the CLA check for more information.
For the most up to date status, view the checks section at the bottom of the pull request.
Really sorry for the big delay here
/gcbrun run_experiment.py -a --experiment-config /opt/fuzzbench/service/experiment-config.yaml --experiment-name 2023-11-09-libfuzzer-coverage --fuzzers libfuzzer_partial_coverage libfuzzer_no_coverage
@jonathanmetzman Thank you very much :)
Experiment 2023-11-09-libfuzzer-coverage
data and results are available at:
The experiment data.
The experiment report.
Hi @jonathanmetzman and @Alan32Liu,
I added modified versions of libfuzzer to test the effectiveness of coverage feedback in libfuzzer. I wish to run an experiment. Could you please help me run the experiment?
/gcbrun run_experiment.py -a --experiment-config /opt/fuzzbench/service/experiment-config.yaml --experiment-name 2023-11-09-libfuzzer-coverage --fuzzers libfuzzer_partial_coverage libfuzzer_no_coverage
Please let me know if this kind of test is recommended to be ran locally. However, when I ran local experiments I had issues with "Corpus not found for cycle" warnings. These warnings seem to be frequent and inconsistent, especially when I run tests with multiple benchmarks and fuzzers. However when I run a local test with a combination of a benchmark and a fuzzer that gave the warning, the warnings disappear. This may not be a critical issue, but it seems to me that when these warnings are related to report with untested pairs. Could you please provide some insight?
Thank you very much :)