🍒/bastille/33e3b07af3ce9595f49c75a8af559bdec5cc19fa+5861234e72c035ad39b5fd843eef78ab4039351e+ac25e8628c443cddd841c6c91d1c9e23e88969e5 #2220
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
JDevlieghere
commented
Dec 10, 2020
JDevlieghere
commented
- [lldb] Include thread id in the reproducer trace (NFC)
- [lldb] Track the API boundary using a thread_local variable.
- [lldb] Deal gracefully with concurrency in the API instrumentation.
Include the current thread ID in the reproducer trace during capture/recording. (cherry picked from commit 33e3b07)
The reproducers currently use a static variable to track the API boundary. This is obviously incorrect when the SB API is used concurrently. While I do not plan to support that use-case (right now), I do want to avoid us crashing. As a first step, correctly track API boundaries across multiple threads. Before this patch SB API calls made by the embedded script interpreter would be considered "behind the API boundary" and correctly ignored. After this patch, we need to tell the reproducers to ignore the scripting thread as a "private thread". Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D92811 (cherry picked from commit 5861234)
Prevent lldb from crashing when multiple threads are concurrently accessing the SB API with reproducer capture enabled. The API instrumentation records both the input arguments and the return value, but it cannot block for the duration of the API call. Therefore we introduce a sequence number that allows to to correlate the function with its result and add locking to ensure those two parts are emitted atomically. Using the sequence number, we can detect situations where the return value does not succeed the function call, in which case we print an error saying that concurrency is not (currently) supported. In the future we might attempt to be smarter and read ahead until we've found the return value matching the current call. Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D92820 (cherry picked from commit ac25e86)
JDevlieghere
deleted the
🍒/bastille/33e3b07af3ce9595f49c75a8af559bdec5cc19fa+5861234e72c035ad39b5fd843eef78ab4039351e+ac25e8628c443cddd841c6c91d1c9e23e88969e5
branch
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.