Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] Add libfuzzer target to fuzz/x86_instruction_emulator

[Tamas K Lengyel <tamas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Jul 18, 2024 at 7:03 AM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 26.06.2024 00:47, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
> > This target enables integration into oss-fuzz. Changing invalid input return
> > to -1 as values other then 0/-1 are reserved by libfuzzer.
>
> And existing behavior (for afl) is unaffected because there we (wrongly)
> ignore the return value altogether.
>
> > @@ -67,7 +70,8 @@ distclean: clean
> >
> >  .PHONY: clean
> >  clean:
> > -     rm -f *.a *.o $(DEPS_RM) afl-harness afl-harness-cov *.gcda *.gcno 
> > *.gcov
> > +     rm -f *.a *.o $(DEPS_RM) *.gcda *.gcno *.gcov \
> > +        afl-harness afl-harness-cov libfuzzer-harness
> >       rm -rf x86_emulate x86-emulate.c x86-emulate.h wrappers.c cpuid.c
>
> This is what I said for v1:
>
> "I'm inclined to suggest it's time to split this line (e.g. keeping all the
>  wildcard patterns together and moving the rest to a new rm invocation)."
>
> Could this really be misunderstood to mean anything other than
>
> clean:
>         rm -f *.a *.o $(DEPS_RM) *.gcda *.gcno *.gcov
>         rm -f afl-harness afl-harness-cov libfuzzer-harness
>         rm -rf x86_emulate x86-emulate.c x86-emulate.h wrappers.c cpuid.c
>
> ?

Evidently, yes.

> With that
> Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
> and I'm kind of okay making that adjustment myself while committing.

Thanks! That is appreciated.
Tamas