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

dev.fuzz: inputs that return interesting outputs should continue to be fuzzed #45761

Open
rolandshoemaker opened this issue Apr 25, 2021 · 0 comments

Comments

@rolandshoemaker
Copy link
Member

@rolandshoemaker rolandshoemaker commented Apr 25, 2021

Currently each input is fuzzed until is causes a crash or returns a single interesting mutation, before moving on to the next input. This input is then only fuzzed again once the input queue cycles. This means that an input that results in interesting outputs is fuzzed equally as inputs which produce nothing interesting.

Ideally the fuzzing shouldn't stop when the first interesting mutation is found, but after some computed number of cycles (where that number of cycles is picked based on some heuristic that favors inputs that produce interesting output, have higher coverage than other inputs, are smaller than other inputs, execute faster than other inputs, etc).

This would probably be implemented at the worker level, with the results either being streamed back to the coordinator, or returned in one big batch (probably the former is better, since it'd require holding less memory and would allow for other workers to start working on a returned input, if everything else has already been consumed).

cc @katiehockman @jayconrod

@rolandshoemaker rolandshoemaker changed the title dev.fuzz: inputs should be f dev.fuzz: inputs that return interesting outputs should continue to be fuzzed Apr 25, 2021
@cherrymui cherrymui added this to the Unplanned milestone Apr 26, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked pull requests

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

None yet
2 participants