Skip to content

[lldb/Plugin] Sort the ScriptedProcess' thread list before creating threads #4128

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Mar 26, 2022

Conversation

medismailben
Copy link

With Scripted Processes, in order to create scripted threads, the blueprint
provides a dictionary that have each thread index as the key with the respective
thread instance as the pair value.

In Python, this is fine because a dictionary key can be of any type including
integer types:

>>> {1: "one", 2: "two", 10: "ten"}
{1: 'one', 2: 'two', 10: 'ten'}

However, when the python dictionary gets bridged to C++ we convert it to a
StructuredData::Dictionary that uses a std::map<ConstString, ObjectSP>
for storage.

Because std::map is an ordered container and ours uses the ConstString
type for keys, the thread indices gets converted to strings which makes the
dictionary sorted alphabetically, instead of numerically.

If the ScriptedProcess has 10 threads or more, it causes thread “10”
(and higher) to be after thread “1”, but before thread “2”.

In order to solve this, this sorts the thread info dictionary keys
numerically, before iterating over them to create ScriptedThreads.

rdar://90327854

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D122429

Signed-off-by: Med Ismail Bennani [email protected]

…process

Previously, the ScriptedThread used the thread index as the thread id.

This patch parses the crashlog json to extract the actual thread "id" value,
and passes this information to the Crashlog ScriptedProcess blueprint,
to create a higher fidelity ScriptedThreaad.

It also updates the blueprint to show the thread name and thread queue.

Finally, this patch updates the interactive crashlog test to reflect
these changes.

rdar://90327854

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D122422

Signed-off-by: Med Ismail Bennani <[email protected]>
This patch changes `StructuredData::Dictionary::GetKeys` return type
from an `StructuredData::ObjectSP` to a `StructuredData::ArraySP`.

The function already stored the keys in an array but implicitely upcasted
it to an `ObjectSP`, which required the user to convert it again to a
Array object to access each element.

Since we know the keys should be held by an iterable container, it makes
more sense to return the allocated ArraySP as-is.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D122426

Signed-off-by: Med Ismail Bennani <[email protected]>
…hreads

With Scripted Processes, in order to create scripted threads, the blueprint
provides a dictionary that have each thread index as the key with the respective
thread instance as the pair value.

In Python, this is fine because a dictionary key can be of any type including
integer types:

```
>>> {1: "one", 2: "two", 10: "ten"}
{1: 'one', 2: 'two', 10: 'ten'}
```

However, when the python dictionary gets bridged to C++ we convert it to a
`StructuredData::Dictionary` that uses a `std::map<ConstString, ObjectSP>`
for storage.

Because `std::map` is an ordered container and ours uses the `ConstString`
type for keys, the thread indices gets converted to strings which makes the
dictionary sorted alphabetically, instead of numerically.

If the ScriptedProcess has 10 threads or more, it causes thread “10”
(and higher) to be after thread “1”, but before thread “2”.

In order to solve this, this sorts the thread info dictionary keys
numerically, before iterating over them to create ScriptedThreads.

rdar://90327854

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D122429

Signed-off-by: Med Ismail Bennani <[email protected]>
@medismailben
Copy link
Author

@swift-ci test

@medismailben medismailben merged commit e9b758d into swiftlang:stable/20211026 Mar 26, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant