Cleanup ipc fuzzer. Add flags to pick random prefix on launch.

Cleanup ipc fuzzer. Add flags to pick random prefix on launch.

R=tsepez@chromium.org,mbarbella@chromium.org
BUG=450268
Committed: https://crrev.com/153aab14615338509845231fec71633823511763
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#313790}

[Martin Barbella, 2015-01-29 19:29:46]

LGTM with nits

https://codereview.chromium.org/888603003/diff/40001/tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/...
File tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/ipc_fuzzer_mut.py (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/888603003/diff/40001/tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/...
tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/ipc_fuzzer_mut.py:52: def
create_mutated_ipcdump_testcase_testcase(self):
Only one _testcase.

https://codereview.chromium.org/888603003/diff/40001/tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/...
tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/ipc_fuzzer_mut.py:53: ipcdumps =
','.join(random.sample(self.corpus, IPCDUMP_MERGE_LIMIT))
Should we actually be using random.sample here? It seems like there's no reason
to avoid picking the same dump twice.

https://codereview.chromium.org/888603003/diff/40001/tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/...
File tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/utils.py (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/888603003/diff/40001/tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/...
tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/utils.py:70: def
random_ipcdump_testcase_path(ipcdump_directory):
I'm fine with this either way, but should we bother generating random paths at
all? We could just use the test case index instead.

[inferno, 2015-01-29 19:38:49]

On 2015/01/29 19:29:46, mbarbella wrote:
> LGTM with nits
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/888603003/diff/40001/tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/...
> File tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/ipc_fuzzer_mut.py (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/888603003/diff/40001/tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/...
> tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/ipc_fuzzer_mut.py:52: def
> create_mutated_ipcdump_testcase_testcase(self):
> Only one _testcase.
> 

done

>
https://codereview.chromium.org/888603003/diff/40001/tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/...
> tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/ipc_fuzzer_mut.py:53: ipcdumps =
> ','.join(random.sample(self.corpus, IPCDUMP_MERGE_LIMIT))
> Should we actually be using random.sample here? It seems like there's no
reason
> to avoid picking the same dump twice.
> 

The corpus can be very large, we pick a few to use.

>
https://codereview.chromium.org/888603003/diff/40001/tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/...
> File tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/utils.py (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/888603003/diff/40001/tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/...
> tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/utils.py:70: def
> random_ipcdump_testcase_path(ipcdump_directory):
> I'm fine with this either way, but should we bother generating random paths at
> all? We could just use the test case index instead.

Can fix it later, fine for now.

[Tom Sepez, 2015-01-29 19:44:59]

I'll defer to inferno@ on this one.  Thanks.

[inferno, 2015-01-29 19:49:04]

On 2015/01/29 19:44:59, Tom Sepez wrote:
> I'll defer to inferno@ on this one.  Thanks.

I think you meant mbarbella@ who already did :)

[inferno, 2015-01-29 19:56:32]

The CQ bit was checked by inferno@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-01-29 19:57:38]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/888603003/60001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-01-29 19:57:39]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-01-29 19:57:40]

No LGTM from a valid reviewer yet. Only full committers are accepted.
Even if an LGTM may have been provided, it was from a non-committer,
_not_ a full super star committer.
See http://www.chromium.org/getting-involved/become-a-committer
Note that this has nothing to do with OWNERS files.

[Tom Sepez, 2015-01-29 19:59:41]

On 2015/01/29 19:57:40, I haz the power (commit-bot) wrote:
> No LGTM from a valid reviewer yet. Only full committers are accepted.
Ha ha.  RS LGTM.

[inferno, 2015-01-29 20:00:00]

The CQ bit was checked by inferno@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-01-29 20:00:47]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/888603003/60001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-01-29 20:06:34]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-01-29 20:06:35]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  chromium_presubmit on tryserver.chromium.linux
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/chromium_presub...)

[inferno, 2015-01-29 20:27:40]

The CQ bit was checked by inferno@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-01-29 20:27:48]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/888603003/80001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-01-29 21:08:49]

Committed patchset #5 (id:80001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-01-29 21:09:38]

Patchset 5 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/153aab14615338509845231fec71633823511763
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#313790}

[inferno, 2015-01-31 06:38:42]

Patchset #6 (id:100001) has been deleted