When fuzzing, it is more desirable to always provoke the server into
sending a response, rather than sometimes accidentally skipping a wire
call because a client-side strictness test failed.
[Our fuzzer could probably be made even more powerful by changing the
fuzzer input file to be a series of records, where each record is the
API to call and then the server's response; right now, the sequence of
APIs called is hard-coded, which is not as powerful at testing
potential cross-command coupling. But that's a project for another
day.]
Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Richard W.M. Jones <rjo...@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Laszlo Ersek <ler...@redhat.com>
---
fuzzing/libnbd-fuzz-wrapper.c | 5 ++++-
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fuzzing/libnbd-fuzz-wrapper.c b/fuzzing/libnbd-fuzz-wrapper.c
index cbd55380..fcd1d04c 100644
--- a/fuzzing/libnbd-fuzz-wrapper.c
+++ b/fuzzing/libnbd-fuzz-wrapper.c
@@ -193,8 +193,11 @@ client (int sock)
}
/* Note we ignore errors in these calls because we are only
- * interested in whether the process crashes.
+ * interested in whether the process crashes. Likewise, we don't
+ * want to accidentally avoid sending traffic to the server merely
+ * because client side strictness sees a problem.
*/
+ nbd_set_strict_mode (nbd, 0);
/* Enable a metadata context, for block status below. */
nbd_add_meta_context (nbd, LIBNBD_CONTEXT_BASE_ALLOCATION);
--
2.41.0
_______________________________________________
Libguestfs mailing list
Libguestfs@redhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libguestfs
