[PATCH] D11277: [lib/Fuzzer] Add sanitizer runtime errors unit save option

[Karl Skomski]

skomski added a comment.

In http://reviews.llvm.org/D11277#207372, @kcc wrote:

> In http://reviews.llvm.org/D11277#206781, @skomski wrote:
>
> > In http://reviews.llvm.org/D11277#206713, @kcc wrote:
> >
> > > First question: why is a log file not enough? 
> > >  It will contain the full sanitizer report (not just summary) and the reproducer. 
> > >  Frankly, to me this looks like a duplicated functionality.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > In http://reviews.llvm.org/D11277#206713, @kcc wrote:
> >
> > > First question: why is a log file not enough? 
> > >  It will contain the full sanitizer report (not just summary) and the reproducer. 
> > >  Frankly, to me this looks like a duplicated functionality.
> >
> >
> > Can you not say the same thing for the current written timeout- and crash files? I like having the files right away it makes it more convenient.
>
>
> That's a bit different. The timeout- and crash- files can be directly given back to the fuzzer (the target function). 
>  The file with the log is for a human being to analyze -- the same as for the error report.


But my patch enables the same behaviour for runtime errors. It does not save the log file but the corresponding unit that is active during the reported sanitizer runtime error.

In http://reviews.llvm.org/D11277#207372, @kcc wrote:

> In http://reviews.llvm.org/D11277#206781, @skomski wrote:
>
> > In http://reviews.llvm.org/D11277#206713, @kcc wrote:
> >
> > > First question: why is a log file not enough? 
> > >  It will contain the full sanitizer report (not just summary) and the reproducer. 
> > >  Frankly, to me this looks like a duplicated functionality.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > In http://reviews.llvm.org/D11277#206713, @kcc wrote:
> >
> > > First question: why is a log file not enough? 
> > >  It will contain the full sanitizer report (not just summary) and the reproducer. 
> > >  Frankly, to me this looks like a duplicated functionality.
> >
> >
> > Can you not say the same thing for the current written timeout- and crash files? I like having the files right away it makes it more convenient.
>
>
> That's a bit different. The timeout- and crash- files can be directly given back to the fuzzer (the target function). 
>  The file with the log is for a human being to analyze -- the same as for the error report.


I don't save the error log but the corresponding unit that is active during time the sanitizer reports the runtime error which results in the same file as timeout and crash files.


http://reviews.llvm.org/D11277