Skip to content

Use the new #available(Android API, *) instead to look for backtrace() #1373

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

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
+4 −12
Open

Use the new #available(Android API, *) instead to look for backtrace() #1373

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
16 changes: 4 additions & 12 deletions Sources/Testing/SourceAttribution/Backtrace.swift
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -40,16 +40,6 @@ public struct Backtrace: Sendable {
self.addresses = addresses.map { Address(UInt(bitPattern: $0)) }
}

#if os(Android) && !SWT_NO_DYNAMIC_LINKING
/// The `backtrace()` function.
///
/// This function was added to Android with API level 33, which is higher than
/// our minimum deployment target, so we look it up dynamically at runtime.
private static let _backtrace = symbol(named: "backtrace").map {
castCFunction(at: $0, to: (@convention(c) (UnsafeMutablePointer<UnsafeMutableRawPointer?>, CInt) -> CInt).self)
}
#endif

/// Get the current backtrace.
///
/// - Parameters:
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -77,8 +67,10 @@ public struct Backtrace: Sendable {
}
#elseif os(Android)
#if !SWT_NO_DYNAMIC_LINKING
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You can get rid of this #if.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I thought so too initially, but the alternative is Android with static linking, in which case it will hit the final #else clause below and error.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That's not what we use SWT_NO_DYNAMIC_LINKING for. We use it to indicate if dlsym() or equivalent is available. (I named it bad.) So you can just remove it. All Android codepaths will go through here. Even statically-linked Android binaries should be able to use weakly-linked NDK symbols.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I see, I thought you meant remove just the #if, meaning adding an &&. I kept the check based on your adding it before and misreading this doc, will remove it.

Unsure how this will interact with static linking executables, given the dynamic linking issue I mentioned, but considering most will static link this into shared libraries eventually, may not matter.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@grynspan's suggestion makes sense - testing requires dynamic linking (i.e. you cannot statically link the testing framework). We know that the platform supports dynamic symbol resolution and because this is within the testing framework, you will be dynamically linking. As a result, just the new handling for the lookup is needed.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You can in fact statically link Swift Testing!

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In any case, we agreed on removing this check, which he had added, not me.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yarp.

if let _backtrace {
initializedCount = .init(clamping: _backtrace(addresses.baseAddress!, .init(clamping: addresses.count)))
if #available(Android 33, *) {
initializedCount = addresses.withMemoryRebound(to: UnsafeMutableRawPointer.self) { addresses in
.init(clamping: backtrace(addresses.baseAddress!, .init(clamping: addresses.count)))
}
}
#endif
#elseif os(Linux) || os(FreeBSD) || os(OpenBSD)
Expand Down