I am using aflplusplus and a custom afl++ fuzzer to do the experiment.
During fuzzbench experiment, afl++ will generate plot_data record:
# relative_time, cycles_done, cur_item, corpus_count, pending_total, pending_favs, map_size, saved_crashes, saved_hangs, max_depth, execs_per_sec, total_execs, edges_found
Fuzzbench will use snapshot to evaluate the fuzzer performance recording: ,git_hash,experiment_filestore,experiment,fuzzer,benchmark,time_started,time_ended,trial_id,time,edges_covered,fuzzer_stats,crash_key,bugs_covered
And I found in the same experiment, edges_found is less than edges_covered. Any idea why?
Additionally, the edges_found in custom_aflpp is higher than edges_found in aflpp, but edges_covered in custom_aflpp is less than edges_found.
Here is the shortcut of raw data:
plot_data of custom_aflpp:
Hi all,
I am using aflplusplus and a custom afl++ fuzzer to do the experiment. During fuzzbench experiment, afl++ will generate plot_data record:
# relative_time, cycles_done, cur_item, corpus_count, pending_total, pending_favs, map_size, saved_crashes, saved_hangs, max_depth, execs_per_sec, total_execs, edges_found
Fuzzbench will use snapshot to evaluate the fuzzer performance recording:,git_hash,experiment_filestore,experiment,fuzzer,benchmark,time_started,time_ended,trial_id,time,edges_covered,fuzzer_stats,crash_key,bugs_covered
And I found in the same experiment, edges_found is less than edges_covered. Any idea why? Additionally, the edges_found in custom_aflpp is higher than edges_found in aflpp, but edges_covered in custom_aflpp is less than edges_found. Here is the shortcut of raw data: plot_data of custom_aflpp:
plot_data of aflpp_baseline: