feat: Add field to RawFrame to control instruction address adjustment #948
Conversation
This file contains 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
|
Another question: should we make |
Codecov ReportBase: 69.38% // Head: 69.41% // Increases project coverage by
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #948 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 69.38% 69.41% +0.02%
==========================================
Files 74 74
Lines 11540 11573 +33
==========================================
+ Hits 8007 8033 +26
- Misses 3533 3540 +7
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. ☔ View full report at Codecov. |
Swatinem
approved these changes
Dec 20, 2022
Swatinem
added a commit
to getsentry/sentry
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 1, 2023
Implements handling of `instruction_addr_adjustment` and attaching appropriate per-frame attributes (`adjust_instruction_addr`) when sending stack traces to symbolicator. It implements the Sentry and Profiling side of [RFC 43](getsentry/rfcs#43) The Symbolicator side is implemented in getsentry/symbolicator#948. --------- Co-authored-by: Sebastian Zivota <loewenheim@mailbox.org>
mikejihbe
pushed a commit
to getsentry/sentry
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 6, 2023
Implements handling of `instruction_addr_adjustment` and attaching appropriate per-frame attributes (`adjust_instruction_addr`) when sending stack traces to symbolicator. It implements the Sentry and Profiling side of [RFC 43](getsentry/rfcs#43) The Symbolicator side is implemented in getsentry/symbolicator#948. --------- Co-authored-by: Sebastian Zivota <loewenheim@mailbox.org>
wmak
pushed a commit
to getsentry/sentry
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 16, 2023
Implements handling of `instruction_addr_adjustment` and attaching appropriate per-frame attributes (`adjust_instruction_addr`) when sending stack traces to symbolicator. It implements the Sentry and Profiling side of [RFC 43](getsentry/rfcs#43) The Symbolicator side is implemented in getsentry/symbolicator#948. --------- Co-authored-by: Sebastian Zivota <loewenheim@mailbox.org>
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 implements the
symbolicatorpart of getsentry/rfcs#43. It adds a new fieldinstruction_addr_needs_adjustment: Option<bool>toRawFramewhich is then used to decide whether the frame's instruction address needs to be adjusted to account for an off-by-one error. Internally, this field is mapped to a new enumAdjustInstructionAddrwhich should make the intended behavior clearer than using a bareOption<bool>.Some open questions:
AdjustInstructionAddr::default_for_threadandAdjustInstructionAddr::for_frameare very short and only used in one place each; I created dedicated functions for clarity and documentation purposes. Should we inline these instead?instruction_addr_needs_adjustmentin the frame returned bysymbolicate_native_frame? Should we use the value from the input frame? Should we just useNone?