Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Aug 31, 2023. It is now read-only.

Update fuzzers for 1.70 and integrate with CI #4570

Draft
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

addisoncrump
Copy link
Contributor

Summary

This extends #4559 by updating API usage to 1.70 and integrates fuzzer runs into the CI. This should only be merged once all the issues currently present in Rome that are discoverable by the fuzzer are found as to avoid false positives in downstream testing.

By integrating fuzzing into the CI, we can detect regressions immediately -- even if we don't have a unit test for that exact case.

Test Plan

This adds additional tests.

Changelog

  • The PR requires a changelog line

Documentation

  • The PR requires documentation
  • I will create a new PR to update the documentation

@netlify
Copy link

netlify bot commented Jun 14, 2023

Deploy Preview for docs-rometools canceled.

Built without sensitive environment variables

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit f4dfc87
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/sites/docs-rometools/deploys/649c4e870c5041000819c28e

@@ -97,6 +97,10 @@ jobs:
bins: cargo-fuzz
- name: Run init-fuzzer
run: bash fuzz/init-fuzzer.sh
- name: Run JS fuzzer for 5 minutes

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

would it be reasonable to put these in a github action matrix to run them in parallel jobs?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Potentially so, but we would need to transfer the build artifacts from the common init step. OR split the init step. Both are possible.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ig a similar thing to do would be to not fail the job if the first fuzz test run fails so the second can also run, with https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/workflow-syntax-for-github-actions#jobsjob_idstrategyfail-fast

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants