Use Backtrace::capture instead of force_capture#3735
Use Backtrace::capture instead of force_capture#3735mschwager wants to merge 2 commits intoAFLplusplus:mainfrom
Conversation
|
Hmm... why caputure a minibsod at all when you don't want to see it? |
I'm not totally following your question. Could you elaborate? Sorry, I'm not very familiar with the codebase. This |
|
I mean my point is that people who use the minibsod crate to create a bsod should get a full bsod (or rather, have the choice in code) Probably in this case we should parse the env variable one layer higher inside libafl_libfuzzer to serve users of that crate IMHO |
|
Looking through the code a bit more I think I see what you're saying. I should've opened an issue here to describe the problem I'm facing rather than jumping straight to a solution. The problem is: when using I'll open an issue better describing the problem I'm facing and we can discuss different solutions there 👍 |
Description
Using
captureinstead offorce_captureallows callers to setRUST_BACKTRACEto their preferred behavior.My motivation here is that, when running in libFuzzer compatibility mode, every discovered crash outputs the
BACKTRACEinformation, which often includes thousands of lines of irrelevant Rust call frame information. I think it's fine to include this as the default behavior, but it'd be nice to allow users to toggle the functionality usingRUST_BACKTRACE.Checklist
./scripts/precommit.shand addressed all comments