-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 103
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Test coverage & fuzzing #1181
Comments
krizhanovsky
modified the milestones:
0.8 TLS 1.3 & TDBv0.2 - Beta,
0.7 HTTP/2 & TLS performance
Jan 3, 2022
krizhanovsky
modified the milestones:
0.7 - HTTP/2, fast in-kernel TLS,
0.9 - POST processing
Jan 3, 2022
We need to know our test coverage to release Beta: 80% is absolute minimum, 95% is the desired value. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Functional tests coverage
Need to deploy a gcov in https://github.com/tempesta-tech/tempesta-test . A test coverage report must be generated (preferably for each CI build or at least by a separate test run).
gcov(1)
show percentage coverage, so the output can be used directly in the report. Maybe it makes sense to uselcov(1)
to get HTML output for all the files at once.The task is crucial since high (as close to 100% as possible) statement coverage is the minimal requirement for GA (high branch and predicate coverages are also wished).
Fuzzing
Kcov with AFL can should be used for fuzzing, see A gentle introduction to Linux Kernel fuzzing.
This must be done at least for TLS handshakes and the HTTP parser - the most security sensitive pieces of code. Different functions should be called by the fuzzer to reveal issues like #1683 , i.e. there should be unit tests using fuzzing.
Open source tools to consider:
References
linux/kernel/gcov
.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: