On Wed, Jul 15, 2026 at 12:06:17PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > On Sat, Jun 27, 2026 at 03:00:42PM -0700, Andrea Pinski wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 18, 2026 at 1:45 PM Kees Cook <[email protected]> wrote: > > > [...] > > > + > > > + > > > printf("\n================================================================\n"); > > > + printf("Passed: %d Failed: %d (%d total tests)\n", pass, fail, pass > > > + fail); > > > + return fail; > > > +} > > > > It would be a good idea to add a random generated testing here. See > > testsuite/objc.dg/gnu-encoding and testsuite/gcc.dg/compat for > > examples. > > Okay, thanks for the pointer; I'll see what I can come up with. I > generally dislike random testing since they may appear to be "flaky" > when they trip, but I'll give it a shot.
I don't see anything we can do valuably here. There's no round-trip parsing going on (there's no independent oracle). For the existing mangling tests, I have hard-coded all the expected strings/hashes. I have gone through the TYPE enums, though, and added a few other missed types for the mangler. But I built a python-based fuzzer anyway, just to see if I could find any other combinatorial ICEs, in case I missed some mixture, and I could only crash the ToT GCC frontend. :P It's okay in 16.1? https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=126284 -Kees -- Kees Cook
