Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Sevostyanov Vladimir, 21AMI-2, Lab1, 2nd variant. #4

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Sevostyanov Vladimir, 21AMI-2, Lab1, 2nd variant. #4

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

VladimirSevostyanov
Copy link

No description provided.

@HabKaffee HabKaffee closed this May 27, 2024
HabKaffee pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 8, 2024
@kendalharland
Fix flake in TestZerothFrame.py (llvm#96685)
4c23625 
This test is currently flaky on a local Windows amd64 build. The reason
is that it relies on the order of `process.threads` but this order is
nondeterministic:

If we print lldb's inputs and outputs while running, we can see that the
breakpoints are always being set correctly, and always being hit:

```sh
runCmd: breakpoint set -f "main.c" -l 2
output: Breakpoint 1: where = a.out`func_inner + 1 at main.c:2:9, address = 0x0000000140001001

runCmd: breakpoint set -f "main.c" -l 7
output: Breakpoint 2: where = a.out`main + 17 at main.c:7:5, address = 0x0000000140001021

runCmd: run
output: Process 52328 launched: 'C:\workspace\llvm-project\llvm\build\lldb-test-build.noindex\functionalities\unwind\zeroth_frame\TestZerothFrame.test_dwarf\a.out' (x86_64)
Process 52328 stopped
* thread #1, stop reason = breakpoint 1.1
    frame #0: 0x00007ff68f6b1001 a.out`func_inner at main.c:2:9
   1    void func_inner() {
-> 2        int a = 1;  // Set breakpoint 1 here
                ^
   3    }
   4
   5    int main() {
   6        func_inner();
   7        return 0; // Set breakpoint 2 here
```

However, sometimes the backtrace printed in this test shows that the
process is stopped inside NtWaitForWorkViaWorkerFactory from
`ntdll.dll`:

```sh
Backtrace at the first breakpoint:
frame #0: 0x00007ffecc7b3bf4 ntdll.dll`NtWaitForWorkViaWorkerFactory + 20
frame #1: 0x00007ffecc74585e ntdll.dll`RtlClearThreadWorkOnBehalfTicket + 862
frame #2: 0x00007ffecc3e257d kernel32.dll`BaseThreadInitThunk + 29
frame #3: 0x00007ffecc76af28 ntdll.dll`RtlUserThreadStart + 40
```

When this happens, the test fails with an assertion error that the
stopped thread's zeroth frame's current line number does not match the
expected line number. This is because the test is looking at the wrong
thread: `process.threads[0]`.

If we print the list of threads each time the test is run, we notice
that threads are sometimes in a different order, within
`process.threads`:

```sh
Thread 0: thread #4: tid = 0x9c38, 0x00007ffecc7b3bf4 ntdll.dll`NtWaitForWorkViaWorkerFactory + 20
Thread 1: thread #2: tid = 0xa950, 0x00007ffecc7b3bf4 ntdll.dll`NtWaitForWorkViaWorkerFactory + 20
Thread 2: thread #1: tid = 0xab18, 0x00007ff64bc81001 a.out`func_inner at main.c:2:9, stop reason = breakpoint 1.1
Thread 3: thread #3: tid = 0xc514, 0x00007ffecc7b3bf4 ntdll.dll`NtWaitForWorkViaWorkerFactory + 20

Thread 0: thread #3: tid = 0x018c, 0x00007ffecc7b3bf4 ntdll.dll`NtWaitForWorkViaWorkerFactory + 20
Thread 1: thread #1: tid = 0x85c8, 0x00007ff7130c1001 a.out`func_inner at main.c:2:9, stop reason = breakpoint 1.1
Thread 2: thread #2: tid = 0xf344, 0x00007ffecc7b3bf4 ntdll.dll`NtWaitForWorkViaWorkerFactory + 20
Thread 3: thread #4: tid = 0x6a50, 0x00007ffecc7b3bf4 ntdll.dll`NtWaitForWorkViaWorkerFactory + 20
```

Use `self.thread()` to consistently select the correct thread, instead.

Co-authored-by: kendal <kendal@thebrowser.company>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@VladimirSevostyanov @HabKaffee