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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Enable symbolication of native stack frames in ANR events #4061
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.
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
Enable symbolication of native stack frames in ANR events #4061
Changes from 9 commits
14c4f0c
3448e7d
9240d3f
47f44f0
49e37b3
7f465d9
79216e2
4ae20df
cb6f40e
b553c09
fcce7b2
cb6fb86
11c5574
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@markushi I'm reading our dev docs which say that
image_addr
andimage_size
are required, but apparently we're not setting them here and symbolicator is still able to symbolicate the frames. Shall we amend the docs? Or is there a possibility of wrong symbolication given we don't have all the sufficient information here?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good point, I think that's fine because
1.) the native dumps doesn't seem to even provide this information (which makes sense, as the state is not in memory anymore)
2.) we set the address mode to relative for every frame here as well:
frame.setAddrMode("rel:" + debugId);
(link)Maybe @loewenheim could chime in here as an expert? If all frame addresses are relative, is it fine to provide no
image_addr
/image_size
in debug meta?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Image size is always optional (we just conservatively assume it extends to the beginning of the next image if it's not set), and the base address is only required for the absolute address mode. As you say, it's fine to leave it out with the relative address mode.
I'm a bit confused about this, though:
The argument of
rel
in Symbolicator is not a debug ID, it's the index of the module in thedebug_meta/images
list in the event.https://github.com/getsentry/symbolicator/blob/2e229b8470fabc5051677ef07d1e77217f921bd2/crates/symbolicator-native/src/interface.rs#L548-L556
Is this fixed up at some later point where the debug ID is replaced by an index? Otherwise this won't work.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actually, I tell a lie, this is taken care of in
sentry
: https://github.com/getsentry/sentry/blob/f242899987f9645bd629b80ef2c86361e53819d4/src/sentry/lang/native/processing.py#L371-L389There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
alright @loewenheim thanks for clearing this out! Do you think we should update the dev docs to specify those are not required in the case of relative mode?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, I would say so.