[lldb] Fix SBMemoryRegionInfoListExtensions iter to yield unique refe… #144815
Conversation
|
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 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. |
|
@llvm/pr-subscribers-lldb Author: Zyn (zyn-li) ChangesThe Moved the object creation inside the loop to ensure each iteration yields a unique instance: TestingUpdated the existing test in
The test validates both that the iterator works correctly and that each yielded object contains the correct data for its respective memory region. Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/144815.diff 2 Files Affected:
diff --git a/lldb/bindings/interface/SBMemoryRegionInfoListExtensions.i b/lldb/bindings/interface/SBMemoryRegionInfoListExtensions.i
index 29c0179c0ffe3..f565f45880119 100644
--- a/lldb/bindings/interface/SBMemoryRegionInfoListExtensions.i
+++ b/lldb/bindings/interface/SBMemoryRegionInfoListExtensions.i
@@ -9,8 +9,8 @@
'''Iterate over all the memory regions in a lldb.SBMemoryRegionInfoList object.'''
import lldb
size = self.GetSize()
- region = lldb.SBMemoryRegionInfo()
for i in range(size):
+ region = lldb.SBMemoryRegionInfo()
self.GetMemoryRegionAtIndex(i, region)
yield region
%}
diff --git a/lldb/test/API/python_api/find_in_memory/TestFindInMemory.py b/lldb/test/API/python_api/find_in_memory/TestFindInMemory.py
index 1ef37d2ec9898..4eabbb6e46774 100644
--- a/lldb/test/API/python_api/find_in_memory/TestFindInMemory.py
+++ b/lldb/test/API/python_api/find_in_memory/TestFindInMemory.py
@@ -154,14 +154,32 @@ def test_find_in_memory_unaligned(self):
self.assertEqual(addr, lldb.LLDB_INVALID_ADDRESS)
def test_memory_info_list_iterable(self):
- """Make sure the SBMemoryRegionInfoList is iterable"""
+ """Make sure the SBMemoryRegionInfoList is iterable and each yielded object is unique"""
self.assertTrue(self.process, PROCESS_IS_VALID)
self.assertState(self.process.GetState(), lldb.eStateStopped, PROCESS_STOPPED)
info_list = self.process.GetMemoryRegions()
self.assertTrue(info_list.GetSize() > 0)
+
+ collected_info = []
try:
- for info in info_list:
- pass
+ for region in info_list:
+ collected_info.append(region)
except Exception:
self.fail("SBMemoryRegionInfoList is not iterable")
+
+ self.assertTrue(len(collected_info) >= 2, "Need at least 2 items")
+ self.assertEqual(len(collected_info), info_list.GetSize(), "Should have collected all items")
+
+ for i in range(len(collected_info)):
+ region = lldb.SBMemoryRegionInfo()
+ info_list.GetMemoryRegionAtIndex(i, region)
+
+ self.assertEqual(collected_info[i].GetRegionBase(), region.GetRegionBase(),
+ f"items {i}: iterator data should match index access data")
+ self.assertEqual(collected_info[i].GetRegionEnd(), region.GetRegionEnd(),
+ f"items {i}: iterator data should match index access data")
+
+ if len(collected_info) >= 2:
+ self.assertNotEqual(collected_info[0].GetRegionBase(), collected_info[1].GetRegionBase(),
+ "Different items should have different base addresses")
|
| region = lldb.SBMemoryRegionInfo() | ||
| info_list.GetMemoryRegionAtIndex(i, region) | ||
|
|
||
| self.assertEqual(collected_info[i].GetRegionBase(), region.GetRegionBase(), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit: We should just add an equality method to SBMemoryRegionInfo and call that.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The equality operator already exists, now leveraging that
|
✅ With the latest revision this PR passed the Python code formatter. |
|
@zyn-li please let me know if you need us to land this on your behalf. |
|
@JDevlieghere Hi, greatly appreciate it if you could land it for me. Thank you! cc: @Jlalond |
|
@zyn-li 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! |
Fixes #144439.
The
__iter__method inSBMemoryRegionInfoListExtensionsreused the sameSBMemoryRegionInfoobject reference across all iterations, only updating its content in each loop. This caused all yielded objects to be references to the same instance.Moved the object creation inside the loop to ensure each iteration yields a unique instance:
Testing
Updated the existing test in
**TestFindInMemory.py**to:The test validates both that the iterator works correctly and that each yielded object contains the correct data for its respective memory region.