Swift call site breakpoints #9493
Merged
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
This fixes the two test suite failures that I missed in the PR: llvm#112939 One was a poorly written test case - it assumed that on connect to a gdb-remote with a running process, lldb MUST have fetched all the frame 0 registers. In fact, there's no need for it to do so (as the CallSite patch showed...) and if we don't need to we shouldn't. So I fixed the test to only expect a `g` packet AFTER calling read_registers. The other was a place where some code had used 0 when it meant LLDB_INVALID_LINE_NUMBER, which I had fixed but missed one place where it was still compared to 0. (cherry picked from commit 7dbbd2b)
…l stack. (llvm#114337) The computation of 'Thread::IsVirtualStep" was wrong - it called being at the bottom of a virtual call stack a "virtual step" but that is actually when you've gotten to concrete code and need to step for real. I also added a test for this. (cherry picked from commit 3243e3d)
The test is currently passing everywhere but this 32-bit arm ubuntu bot. I don't have an easy way to debug this, so I'm skipping the test on that platform till we get a chance to figure this out. (cherry picked from commit a218f0f)
|
@swift-ci test |
When you set a "next branch breakpoint" and run to it while stepping, you have to claim the stop at that breakpoint to be the top of the inlined call stack, or you will seem to "step in" and then plans might try to step back out again. This records the PrefferedLineEntry for next branch breakpoints and adds a test to make sure this works. (cherry picked from commit 23a01a4)
I have to check for the sc list size being changed by the call-site search, not just that it had more than one element. Added a test for multiple CU's with the same name in a given module, which would have caught this mistake. We were also doing all the work to find call sites when the found decl and specified decl's only difference was a column, but the incoming specification hadn't specified a column (column number == 0). (cherry picked from commit 803f957)
|
@swift-ci please test |
|
@swift-ci please test |
adrian-prantl
approved these changes
Nov 6, 2024
| self.assertIn("a.testStringify", thread.frames[0].name, "Step out back to origin") | ||
| thread.StepInto() | ||
| self.assertIn( | ||
| "freestanding macro expansion #1 of no_return in module a file main.swift line 6 column 3", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These demanglings may not be stable — but whoever changes them in the future can also update this test.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, it was so handy that these names had the compiler's view of both the call site and the expansion order to confirm we hit the right one, and it serves as a check against our reading of the line table. So I do think it's worth tracking changes in the demangling.
|
The Linux bot failed because the "set a breakpoint on a REPL defined function then call it" timed out without so far as I can tell producing anything to match against. Sounds like the REPL just never came up? I'll try again. |
|
@swift-ci please test Linux |
ahoppen
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 8, 2024
Revert "Merge pull request #9493 from jimingham/swift-call-site-breakpoints"
jimingham
added a commit
to jimingham/from-apple-llvm-project
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 8, 2024
…t-call-site-breakpoints"" This reverts commit c93fb6d.
jimingham
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 8, 2024
Revert "Merge pull request #9493 from jimingham/swift-call-site-break…
jimingham
added a commit
to jimingham/from-apple-llvm-project
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 14, 2024
…t-call-site-breakpoints"" This reverts commit c93fb6d.
Merged
jimingham
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 15, 2025
Revert "Revert "Merge pull request #9493 from jimingham/swift-call-si…
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.
This is a cherry-pick of the main patch to add the ability to set breakpoints on call-site file & line numbers, and to handle hitting breakpoints in a virtual inlined call stack correctly.