From: Josh Steadmon <steadmon@google.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] fuzz: Add basic fuzz testing target.
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 17:59:18 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181013005918.GD12177@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqva6amtt7.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
On 2018.10.10 11:14, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Josh Steadmon <steadmon@google.com> writes:
>
> > +FUZZ_OBJS += fuzz-pack-headers.o
> > +
> > +FUZZ_PROGRAMS += $(patsubst %.o,%,$(FUZZ_OBJS))
> > +
> > ...
> > +### Fuzz testing
> > +#
> > +.PHONY: fuzz-clean fuzz-objs fuzz-compile
>
> I take it that you anticipate the fuzz programs in the future all
> be named fuzz-$(blah), whose source is fuzz-$(blah).o (even though
> we may grow some common code that may be linked with them, which can
> be done by tweaking the rule for the $(FUZZ_PROGRAMS) target). Am I
> reading you correctly? Would fuzz-{clean,objs,compile} risk squatting
> on nicer names we may want to use for $(blah) down the line?
Yes, that's correct. I've reworked the rules to be more compatible with
how OSS-Fuzz expects to build these targets, and now "fuzz-all" is
the only remaining special target.
> > + ...
> > +$(FUZZ_PROGRAMS): fuzz-compile
> > + clang++ $(FUZZ_LDFLAGS) $(LIB_OBJS) $(BUILTIN_OBJS) $(XDIFF_OBJS) \
> > + $(EXTLIBS) git.o $@.o /usr/lib/llvm-4.0/lib/libFuzzer.a -o $@
>
> Is the expected usage pattern to know a single fuzz-* program the
> builder wants to build, to run "make fuzz-pack-headers"? If not, it
> also would be a good idea to have something like
>
> fuzz-build-all:: $(FUZZ_PROGRAMS)
> .PHONY: fuzz-build-all
>
> perhaps?
>
> Also, in the final version we unleash to general developer audience,
> we'd want to support "make V=1" (and "make" that is "$(QUIET)").
Done and done.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-13 0:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-04 23:01 [RFC PATCH 0/2] add fuzzing targets for use with LLVM libFuzzer Josh Steadmon
2018-10-04 23:01 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] fuzz: Add basic fuzz testing target Josh Steadmon
2018-10-10 2:14 ` Junio C Hamano
2018-10-13 0:59 ` Josh Steadmon [this message]
2018-10-04 23:01 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] fuzz: Add fuzz testing for packfile indices Josh Steadmon
2018-10-10 2:19 ` Junio C Hamano
2018-10-13 0:58 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] add fuzzing targets for use with OSS-Fuzz steadmon
2018-10-13 0:58 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] fuzz: Add basic fuzz testing target steadmon
2018-10-13 0:58 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] fuzz: Add fuzz testing for packfile indices steadmon
2018-10-16 6:18 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] add fuzzing targets for use with OSS-Fuzz Junio C Hamano
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20181013005918.GD12177@google.com \
--to=steadmon@google.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.