New issue
Advanced search Search tips

Issue 858849 link

Starred by 1 user

Issue metadata

Status: WontFix
Owner: ----
Closed: Jul 1
Cc:
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: Linux
Pri: 1
Type: Bug



Sign in to add a comment

CHECK failure: float_logical_location.Y() == new_logical_top_margin_edge in layout_block_flow.c

Project Member Reported by ClusterFuzz, Jun 28 2018

Issue description

Detailed report: https://clusterfuzz.com/testcase?key=6098912671432704

Fuzzer: bj_broddelwerk
Job Type: linux_debug_chrome
Platform Id: linux

Crash Type: CHECK failure
Crash Address: 
Crash State:
  float_logical_location.Y() == new_logical_top_margin_edge in layout_block_flow.c
  blink::LayoutBlockFlow::PositionAndLayoutFloat
  blink::LineLayoutBlockFlow::PositionAndLayoutFloat
  
Sanitizer: address (ASAN)

Reproducer Testcase: https://clusterfuzz.com/download?testcase_id=6098912671432704

Issue filed automatically.

See https://github.com/google/clusterfuzz-tools for more information.
 
Project Member

Comment 1 by ClusterFuzz, Jun 28 2018

Components: Blink>Layout
Labels: Test-Predator-Auto-Components
Automatically applying components based on crash stacktrace and information from OWNERS files.

If this is incorrect, please apply the Test-Predator-Wrong-Components label.
Cc: kkaluri@chromium.org
Labels: M-68 Test-Predator-Wrong CF-NeedsTriage
Unable to find actual suspect through code search and also observing no CL's under regression range, hence adding appropriate label and requesting someone from Android team to look in to this issue.

Thanks!

Status: WontFix (was: Untriaged)
Not a security issue and no reports in the wild. As this code is being replaced by LayoutNG it doesn't seem worth the effort to look into it.
Project Member

Comment 4 by ClusterFuzz, Jul 8

Labels: Needs-Feedback
ClusterFuzz testcase 6098912671432704 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.

Sign in to add a comment