CHECK failure: message->data_num_bytes() < GetConfiguration().max_message_num_bytes in node_cha |
||||||||||
Issue descriptionDetailed report: https://clusterfuzz.com/testcase?key=6202385048010752 Fuzzer: inferno_twister Job Type: linux_lsan_chrome_mp Platform Id: linux Crash Type: CHECK failure Crash Address: Crash State: message->data_num_bytes() < GetConfiguration().max_message_num_bytes in node_cha mojo::edk::NodeChannel::WriteChannelMessage mojo::edk::NodeChannel::SendChannelMessage Sanitizer: address (ASAN) Regressed: https://clusterfuzz.com/revisions?job=linux_lsan_chrome_mp&range=523898:523900 Reproducer Testcase: https://clusterfuzz.com/download?testcase_id=6202385048010752 Additional requirements: Requires HTTP Issue filed automatically. See https://github.com/google/clusterfuzz-tools for more information.
,
Apr 27 2018
Predator and CL could not provide any possible suspects. Using the code search for the file, “node_channel.cc” assigning to concern owner from GIT blame. Suspecting Commit# https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/0d4eb8a5f8d99d365459af21442cbc7b8648cf66 @rockot -- Could you please look into this issue, kindly reassign if it has nothing to do with your changes. Thank You.
,
Apr 27 2018
Add another large message to the pile. This is just a free-form string I guess. May the JS API should impose a limitation on length?
,
Apr 27 2018
This one is in cache storage I think? But yeah, just a "harmless" free form string passed to some API that is then passed over mojo. At least for this case I agree that the spec probably should specify some sensible limit on cache name sizes that browser should support, as it doesn't really make sense to support multi MB (or even KB) cache names.
,
Apr 27 2018
,
Apr 28 2018
,
Apr 29 2018
,
Jul 13
ClusterFuzz testcase 6202385048010752 appears to be flaky, updating reproducibility label.
,
Jul 19
ClusterFuzz testcase 6202385048010752 is flaky and no longer crashes, so closing issue. If this is incorrect, please add ClusterFuzz-Wrong label and re-open the issue.
,
Jul 27
,
Jul 27
ClusterFuzz testcase 4550381766705152 is still reproducing on tip-of-tree build (trunk). If this testcase was not reproducible locally or unworkable, ignore this notification and we will file another bug soon with hopefully a better and workable testcase. Otherwise, if this is not intended to be fixed (e.g. this is an intentional crash), please add ClusterFuzz-Ignore label to prevent future bug filing with similar crash stacktrace.
,
Jul 30
|
||||||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
||||||||||
Comment 1 by ClusterFuzz
, Apr 27 2018