| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
BUG=skia:
GOLD_TRYBOT_URL= https://gold.skia.org/search?issue=4798
Change-Id: Ia93b4eeea82dd04f0c6bd287f61d26086a0aa740
Reviewed-on: https://skia-review.googlesource.com/4798
Reviewed-by: Kevin Lubick <kjlubick@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Kevin Lubick <kjlubick@google.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We use this approach instead of T next() because different compilers
evaluate function parameters in different orders. If fuzz->next()
returned 5 and then 7, foo(fuzz->next(), fuzz->next()) would be
foo(5, 7) when compiled on GCC and foo(7, 5) when compiled on Clang.
By requiring params to be passed in, we avoid the temptation to call
next() in a way that does not consume fuzzed bytes in a single
platform-independent order.
BUG=skia:
GOLD_TRYBOT_URL= https://gold.skia.org/search?issue=4392
Change-Id: I35de849f82e8be45378f662a48100eb732fa8895
Reviewed-on: https://skia-review.googlesource.com/4392
Reviewed-by: Mike Klein <mtklein@chromium.org>
Commit-Queue: Kevin Lubick <kjlubick@google.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
signalBoring() no longer exists. When the fuzzer runs out of randomness,
it just returns 0. Fuzzers should not go into infinite loops if this
happens. do while loops are particularly error-prone.
BUG=skia:
GOLD_TRYBOT_URL= https://gold.skia.org/search?issue=3963
Change-Id: Iebcfc14cc6b0a19c5dd015cd39875c81fa44003e
Reviewed-on: https://skia-review.googlesource.com/3963
Commit-Queue: Kevin Lubick <kjlubick@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Mike Klein <mtklein@chromium.org>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
BUG=skia:
GOLD_TRYBOT_URL= https://gold.skia.org/search?issue=2389853002
Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2389853002
|
|
|
This is based on https://codereview.chromium.org/1675053002
BUG=skia:4438
GOLD_TRYBOT_URL= https://gold.skia.org/search2?unt=true&query=source_type%3Dgm&master=false&issue=1702383003
Review URL: https://codereview.chromium.org/1702383003
|
Kevin Lubick