D73303 was failing on Fedora Linux and so it was disabled by Skip the AssertFrameRecognizer test for Linux.
I find no easy way how to find out if it gets recognized as __assert_fail or __GI___assert_fail as when ModuleHasDebugInfo gets called libc.so.6 is not yet loaded by the debuggee.
DWARF symbol __GI___assert_fail overrides the ELF symbol __assert_fail.
While external debug info (=DWARF) gets disabled for testsuite (D55859) that sure does not apply for real world usage.
Details
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rG LLVM Github Monorepo
Event Timeline
Originally, when I implemented the patch and tested it on linux, the symbol on the abort frame was (GI_assert_fail) on my machine.
This is why I thought I'd need to support both.
Otherwise, LGTM!
Thanks for investigating the issue.
lldb/source/Target/AssertFrameRecognizer.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
19–38 | In this case, we can also remove this. | |
63–64 | And also this if global bindings are preferred. |
Maybe you did not have settings set symbols.enable-external-lookup false like the testsuite. Or you used LLDB before Jan 13th (D63540).
Thanks for verifying it, going to land it.
I have reverted this change as it fixed the testsuite but real world usage was broken:
(lldb) run assert.test.tmp.out: /home/jkratoch/redhat/llvm-monorepo/lldb/test/Shell/Recognizer/Inputs/assert.c:7: int main(): Assertion `a == 42' failed. Process 12062 stopped * thread #1, name = 'assert.test.tmp', stop reason = signal SIGABRT frame #0: 0x00007ffff7ddee35 libc.so.6`__GI_raise(sig=2) at raise.c:51:1 48 __libc_signal_restore_set (&set); 49 50 return ret; -> 51 } 52 libc_hidden_def (raise) 53 weak_alias (raise, gsignal)
I think it really needs to compare both variants of the function name on Linux.
Both variants get mapped name->address but it is difficult to say which one will get looked up address->name.
Otherwise one could also fix why DWARF resolves the __GI_* variants from:
<4d4b> DW_AT_linkage_name: (indirect string, offset: 0x1b784): __GI___assert_fail <4d4f> DW_AT_name : (indirect string, offset: 0x1b789): __assert_fail
We'd like to avoid registering recognizers multiple times for the same purpose ...
This could cause some issues down the road, since those recognizers can - indirectly - perform an action (change the current frame or the stop reason).
Also, from a usability stand-point, this could be confusing for the user when listing recognizers.
Knowing that this will be called every time a thread stops, it would be better if we could avoid processing a regex every time we try to recognise a frame. But if that's the only way to solve the issue ...
Or StackFrameRecognizerManagerImpl::AddRecognizer and its m_recognizers can have ConstString symbol1, symbol2;. What is less bad?
This sounds like a good idea, but let's leave symbol as is and add a ConstString alternate_symbol in StackFrameRecognizerManagerImpl::RegisteredEntry defaulting to an empty ConstString
FYI this had a purpose. Any code touching symbol should be rechecked if it should not handle also alternate_symbol now. Both in existing codebase and also in any 3rd party patches we do not know.
Hello Jan,
Has the latest version of this patch landed yet or does it need some extra work ?
lldb/source/Commands/CommandObjectFrame.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
966 ↗ | (On Diff #243480) | We should stream to the output stream directly to avoid all these useless conversions. |
lldb/source/Target/AssertFrameRecognizer.cpp | ||
28 | With two elements in the tuple I was torn between a struct with named fields, but with 3 fields I strongly believe that would be the better choice. | |
147 | I believe someone added an overload for comparing ConstStrings with StringRefs. We shouldn't have to pay the price of creating one here just for comparison. Same below. |
@davide Sorry for the revert rG6b2979c12300b90a1e69791d43ee9cff14f4265e - I will find some way to test stuff on OSX, I already made too many OSX breakages recently.
lldb/source/Target/AssertFrameRecognizer.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
147 | I really don't want a == overload for StringRef in ConstString. The *only* reason for using ConstString is using less memory for duplicate strings and being fast to compare against other ConstStrings. So if we add an overload for comparing against StringRef then code like this will look really innocent even though it essentially goes against the idea of ConstString. Either both string lists are using ConstString or neither does (which I would prefer). But having a list of normal strings and comparing it against ConstStrings usually means that the design is kinda flawed. Then we have both normal string comparisons but also the whole overhead of ConstString. Looking at this patch we already construct at one point a ConstString from the function name at one point, so that might as well be a ConstString in the first place. If we had an implicit comparison than the conversion here would look really innocent and no one would notice. |
lldb/source/Target/AssertFrameRecognizer.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
147 | Hmm, you're totally right, I must be confusing this with something else then. |
lldb/source/Target/AssertFrameRecognizer.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
147 |
Just for completeness, a huge use-case for ConstString in LLDB are as keys in DenseMaps and sorted vectors. This avoids redundantly string them in multiple StringMaps. |
In this case, we can also remove this.