Raise if a stack frame reference has been invalidated from a further capture #14
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
Seems like this would be a non-standard attribute which shouldn't be necessary for correctness.
…capture Otherwise, we could be accessing an object that hasn't been marked which would cause undefined behaviour.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Problem
When a
StackFrames::Buffer#captureis called more than once, any StackFrames::Frame objects obtained from a previous capture with a frame number higher than the most recent capture's length will no longer reference a marked profile frame object. This library needs to prevent using those no longer marked profile frame objects in the StackFrames::Buffer, but the provided regression test shows nothing gets raised when this happens without the corresponding fix.Solution
StackFrames::Framejust holds an index into the buffer, so I added a bounds check to catch this possible application bug so it can't produce undefined behaviour in this way.