A slight change to SET_LINENO-less tracing.

This makes things a touch more like 2.2.  Read the comments in
Python/ceval.c for more details.
This commit is contained in:
Michael W. Hudson 2002-09-11 15:36:32 +00:00
parent 519a342d79
commit 02ff6a9952
5 changed files with 59 additions and 12 deletions

View File

@ -29,6 +29,8 @@ typedef struct _frame {
PyObject *f_exc_type, *f_exc_value, *f_exc_traceback;
PyThreadState *f_tstate;
int f_lasti; /* Last instruction if called */
/* As of 2.3 f_lineno is only valid when tracing is active (i.e. when
f_trace is set) -- at other times use PyCode_Addr2Line instead. */
int f_lineno; /* Current line number */
int f_restricted; /* Flag set if restricted operations
in this scope */

View File

@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ no_pop_tops.events = [(0, 'call'),
(3, 'line'),
(4, 'line'),
(2, 'line'),
(6, 'return')]
(2, 'return')]
def no_pop_blocks():
while 0:

View File

@ -888,12 +888,10 @@ tracer_callback(ProfilerObject *self, PyFrameObject *frame, int what,
case PyTrace_LINE:
if (self->linetimings)
return pack_lineno_tdelta(self, PyCode_Addr2Line(frame->f_code,
frame->f_lasti),
return pack_lineno_tdelta(self, frame->f_lineno),
get_tdelta(self));
else
return pack_lineno(self, PyCode_Addr2Line(frame->f_code,
frame->f_lasti));
return pack_lineno(self, frame->f_lineno);
default:
/* ignore PyTrace_EXCEPTION */

View File

@ -17,7 +17,6 @@ static PyMemberDef frame_memberlist[] = {
{"f_globals", T_OBJECT, OFF(f_globals), RO},
{"f_lasti", T_INT, OFF(f_lasti), RO},
{"f_restricted",T_INT, OFF(f_restricted),RO},
{"f_trace", T_OBJECT, OFF(f_trace)},
{"f_exc_type", T_OBJECT, OFF(f_exc_type)},
{"f_exc_value", T_OBJECT, OFF(f_exc_value)},
{"f_exc_traceback", T_OBJECT, OFF(f_exc_traceback)},
@ -37,14 +36,49 @@ frame_getlineno(PyFrameObject *f, void *closure)
{
int lineno;
lineno = PyCode_Addr2Line(f->f_code, f->f_lasti);
if (f->f_trace)
lineno = f->f_lineno;
else
lineno = PyCode_Addr2Line(f->f_code, f->f_lasti);
return PyInt_FromLong(lineno);
}
static PyObject *
frame_gettrace(PyFrameObject *f, void *closure)
{
PyObject* trace = f->f_trace;
if (trace == NULL)
trace = Py_None;
Py_INCREF(trace);
return trace;
}
static int
frame_settrace(PyFrameObject *f, PyObject* v, void *closure)
{
/* We rely on f_lineno being accurate when f_trace is set. */
PyObject* old_value = f->f_trace;
Py_XINCREF(v);
f->f_trace = v;
if (v != NULL)
f->f_lineno = PyCode_Addr2Line(f->f_code, f->f_lasti);
Py_XDECREF(old_value);
return 0;
}
static PyGetSetDef frame_getsetlist[] = {
{"f_locals", (getter)frame_getlocals, NULL, NULL},
{"f_lineno", (getter)frame_getlineno, NULL, NULL},
{"f_trace", (getter)frame_gettrace, (setter)frame_settrace, NULL},
{0}
};

View File

@ -2909,7 +2909,7 @@ maybe_call_line_trace(int opcode, Py_tracefunc func, PyObject *obj,
>> 21 LOAD_CONST 0 (None)
24 RETURN_VALUE
If a is false, execution will jump to instruction at offset
If 'a' is false, execution will jump to instruction at offset
15 and the co_lnotab will claim that execution has moved to
line 3. This is at best misleading. In this case we could
associate the POP_TOP with line 4, but that doesn't make
@ -2920,21 +2920,32 @@ maybe_call_line_trace(int opcode, Py_tracefunc func, PyObject *obj,
current instruction offset matches the offset given for the
start of a line by the co_lnotab.
This also takes care of the situation where a is true.
This also takes care of the situation where 'a' is true.
Execution will jump from instruction offset 12 to offset 21.
Then the co_lnotab would imply that execution has moved to line
5, which is again misleading.
Why do we set f_lineno when tracing? Well, consider the code
above when 'a' is true. If stepping through this with 'n' in
pdb, you would stop at line 1 with a "call" type event, then
line events on lines 2 and 3, then a "return" type event -- but
you would be shown line 5 during this event. This is a change
from the behaviour in 2.2 and before, and I've found it
confusing in practice. By setting and using f_lineno when
tracing, one can report a line number different from that
suggested by f_lasti on this one occasion where it's desirable.
*/
if ((frame->f_lasti < *instr_lb || frame->f_lasti >= *instr_ub)) {
PyCodeObject* co = frame->f_code;
int size, addr;
int size, addr, line;
unsigned char* p;
size = PyString_GET_SIZE(co->co_lnotab) / 2;
p = (unsigned char*)PyString_AS_STRING(co->co_lnotab);
addr = 0;
line = co->co_firstlineno;
/* possible optimization: if f->f_lasti == instr_ub
(likely to be a common case) then we already know
@ -2951,12 +2962,14 @@ maybe_call_line_trace(int opcode, Py_tracefunc func, PyObject *obj,
if (addr + *p > frame->f_lasti)
break;
addr += *p++;
p++;
line += *p++;
--size;
}
if (addr == frame->f_lasti)
if (addr == frame->f_lasti) {
frame->f_lineno = line;
call_trace(func, obj, frame,
PyTrace_LINE, Py_None);
}
*instr_lb = addr;
if (size > 0) {
while (--size >= 0) {