Test 0-length-arrays in fuzzing tests #37823
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Trying to create IntStrs from int64s rather than int32s resulted in lots of glog.Error messages that showed up when running tests with "-v".
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
cncf-cla: yes
|
This change is |
k8s-github-robot
added
size/M
smarterclayton
added
lgtm
|
Automatic merge from submit-queue (batch tested with PRs 38049, 37823, 38000, 36646) |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
While hacking on #37289 I noticed that our fuzzing tests test nil slices and slices of length 1, but not slices of length 0, meaning we aren't testing that 0-length slices get treated the same as nil in all the places we expect them to (and in particular, we aren't ensuring that comparisons always use api.Semantic.DeepEqual rather than reflect.DeepEqual). (Though in fact, changing the fuzzer didn't turn up any bugs, so maybe this effectively gets tested somewhere else...)
fuzz.New().NilChance(.5).NumElements(0, 1)means we end up generatingnil50% of the time, a length 0 array 25% of the time, and a length 1 array 25% of the time... maybe it should befuzz.New().NilChance(.33).NumElements(0, 1)instead?The gofuzz rebase is to pull in google/gofuzz#20, and the other fix is just a drive-by.