> Looks good! Please submit a Pull Request that Armin (and others) can
> review.
Done!
The fuzzer already found a bug in the renderer, I have attached a patch (diff.txt) to
If you require a merge request instead, then I'll make it tomorrow.
Also, there is a timeout in one of the tests:
240 - truetype-render-i38:oss-fuzz/10398-5653547685773312-timeout (Timeout)
Is there a way to increase the timeout ? As I would like to test this locally
and confirm that it's just a timeout and not a bug.
> I think generally there are two options:
>
> - We do have a few screws at this point to steer how many glyphs we're
> looking at in a single fuzzer run. We could either use one of the existing
> ones or, if they are to coarse, we could introduce new screws that
> specifically target the SDF mode.
>
> - Alternatively SDF could get it's very own fuzzer. We've already done this
> to separate rendering from utility access; we _could_ look into further
> separating fuzzing rendering from fuzzing SDF rendering. Although, that
> would be quite a lot of work.
Seeing how slow the `sdf` renderer is I think the second option would
be better. Dominik recently added the COLRv1 fuzzer, if the process is
similar, then I can work on adding a new fuzzer for SDF.
Thanks,
Anuj
diff.txt