| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
When using `HARNESS_JOBS` to run the tests in parallel, no matter the
level of parallelism that can be used, the monolithic `test_fuzz` takes
a long time to run, conditioning the duration of the whole build.
This commit splits the single `test_fuzz` recipe into separate recipes
for each fuzzer.
The previous mechanism to select individual fuzz tests using the
`FUZZ_TESTS` environment variable is also dropped (and documentation
updated).
Reviewed-by: Richard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>
(Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/13307)
|
|
easily
Reviewed-by: Richard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>
(Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/12359)
|
|
CLA: trivial
Reviewed-by: Shane Lontis <shane.lontis@oracle.com>
Reviewed-by: Matthias St. Pierre <Matthias.St.Pierre@ncp-e.com>
(Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/12320)
|
|
Reviewed-by: Tomas Mraz <tmraz@fedoraproject.org>
Reviewed-by: Matthias St. Pierre <Matthias.St.Pierre@ncp-e.com>
(Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/11739)
|
|
Reviewed-by: Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be>
Reviewed-by: Matt Caswell <matt@openssl.org>
(Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/11386)
|
|
Recent clang versions ship with libfuzzer, so there's no need to build
libfuzzer yourself. They also have a dedicated -fsanitize=fuzzer-no-link
flag and no longer support the sanitize flags described in the fuzzing
README. Update it to reflect all this.
Fixes #8768.
Reviewed-by: Matt Caswell <matt@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be>
GH: #8891
|
|
Building with enable-fuzz-afl has always required no-shared. We now also
need no-module for a successful build. Therefore update the README
accordingly.
Reviewed-by: Richard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>
(Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/9721)
|
|
Fixes a minor typo that would cause the linker to complain about not finding -lFuzzer
CLA: trivial
Reviewed-by: Matthias St. Pierre <Matthias.St.Pierre@ncp-e.com>
Reviewed-by: Richard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>
(Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/7197)
|
|
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: Richard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>
GH: #4648
|
|
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: Andy Polyakov <appro@openssl.org>
GH: #2683
|
|
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: Andy Polyakov <appro@openssl.org>
GH: #2683
|
|
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
GH: #2182
|
|
We use those parameters for calculating the coverage.
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
GH: #2088
|
|
This is something you might want to change depending on the version to
use, there is no point in us fixing this to something.
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
GH: #2023
|
|
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
GH: #2023
|
|
CLA: trivial
Reviewed-by: Kurt Roeckx <kurt@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
(Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/1801)
|
|
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
|
|
Reviewed-by: Kurt Roeckx <kurt@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: Richard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>
|
|
Reviewed-by: Ben Laurie <ben@links.org>
MR: #2740
|
|
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
|
|
Reviewed-by: Emilia Käsper <emilia@openssl.org>
|
