[PDB] Fix missing consumeError which raise error with asserts enabled

[romainthomas]

As mentioned in the title, the missing consumeError trigger assertions

[github-actions]

Thank you for submitting a Pull Request (PR) to the LLVM Project!

This PR will be automatically labeled and the relevant teams will be notified.

If you wish to, you can add reviewers by using the "Reviewers" section on this page.

If this is not working for you, it is probably because you do not have write permissions for the repository. In which case you can instead tag reviewers by name in a comment by using @ followed by their GitHub username.

If you have received no comments on your PR for a week, you can request a review by "ping"ing the PR by adding a comment “Ping”. The common courtesy "ping" rate is once a week. Please remember that you are asking for valuable time from other developers.

If you have further questions, they may be answered by the LLVM GitHub User Guide.

You can also ask questions in a comment on this PR, on the LLVM Discord or on the forums.

[llvmbot]

@llvm/pr-subscribers-platform-windows

@llvm/pr-subscribers-debuginfo

Author: Romain Thomas (romainthomas)

Changes

As mentioned in the title, the missing consumeError trigger assertions

---

Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116480.diff

1 Files Affected:

• (modified) llvm/lib/DebugInfo/PDB/Native/SymbolCache.cpp (+6-2)

diff --git a/llvm/lib/DebugInfo/PDB/Native/SymbolCache.cpp b/llvm/lib/DebugInfo/PDB/Native/SymbolCache.cpp
index 463b9ebe3cbff5..95b95a5bbc509f 100644
--- a/llvm/lib/DebugInfo/PDB/Native/SymbolCache.cpp
+++ b/llvm/lib/DebugInfo/PDB/Native/SymbolCache.cpp
@@ -388,12 +388,16 @@ SymbolCache::findPublicSymbolBySectOffset(uint32_t Sect, uint32_t Offset) {
     return getSymbolById(Iter->second);
 
   auto Publics = Session.getPDBFile().getPDBPublicsStream();
-  if (!Publics)
+  if (!Publics) {
+    consumeError(Publics.takeError());
     return nullptr;
+  }
 
   auto ExpectedSyms = Session.getPDBFile().getPDBSymbolStream();
-  if (!ExpectedSyms)
+  if (!ExpectedSyms) {
+    consumeError(ExpectedSyms.takeError());
     return nullptr;
+  }
   BinaryStreamRef SymStream =
       ExpectedSyms->getSymbolArray().getUnderlyingStream();
 

[nikic]

This looks reasonable to me, but I'm not familiar with the code. Is this something that we can reasonably test or not?

[romainthomas]

I can't share the PDB that triggers this code path but the changes are pretty conservative and idiomatic with other consumeError used in this source file.

[nikic]

LGTM

[github-actions]

@romainthomas Congratulations on having your first Pull Request (PR) merged into the LLVM Project!

Your changes will be combined with recent changes from other authors, then tested by our build bots. If there is a problem with a build, you may receive a report in an email or a comment on this PR.

Please check whether problems have been caused by your change specifically, as the builds can include changes from many authors. It is not uncommon for your change to be included in a build that fails due to someone else's changes, or infrastructure issues.

How to do this, and the rest of the post-merge process, is covered in detail here.

If your change does cause a problem, it may be reverted, or you can revert it yourself. This is a normal part of LLVM development. You can fix your changes and open a new PR to merge them again.

If you don't get any reports, no action is required from you. Your changes are working as expected, well done!

[aganea]

I can't share the PDB that triggers this code path but the changes are pretty conservative and idiomatic with other consumeError used in this source file.

Are you able nevertheless to craft a reduced test that exercices this codepath? There's quite a few examples in https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/tree/main/llvm/test/DebugInfo/PDB (please see the Inputs folder as well). But I wonder if yaml2pdb forcibly writes the publics stream, if that's the issue. There's indeed some other examples in the repo where we store corrupted PDBs or PDBs that we couldn't create otherwise with yaml2pdb. It'd be good to understand how you got that (bad?) PDB.