From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Philipp Stephani
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs
Subject: bug#42701: 28.0.50;
Duplicate Edebug instrumentation of lambda form in some cases
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2020 16:59:57 +0200
Message-ID:
References:
<20200804201258.73145.qmail@mail.muc.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214";
logging-data="37998"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io"
Cc: 42701@debbugs.gnu.org
To: Alan Mackenzie
Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Aug 09 17:01:13 2020
Return-path:
Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org
Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17])
by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.92)
(envelope-from )
id 1k4moz-0009o4-0B
for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 09 Aug 2020 17:01:13 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54056 helo=lists1p.gnu.org)
by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
(envelope-from )
id 1k4mox-0005gi-EA
for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 09 Aug 2020 11:01:11 -0400
Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:53448)
by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from )
id 1k4moo-0005gR-6G
for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 09 Aug 2020 11:01:02 -0400
Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:49953)
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from )
id 1k4mon-0007re-TL
for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 09 Aug 2020 11:01:01 -0400
Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from ) id 1k4mon-0007Cg-NN
for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 09 Aug 2020 11:01:01 -0400
X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org
Resent-From: Philipp Stephani
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit"
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
Resent-Date: Sun, 09 Aug 2020 15:01:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID:
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 42701
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
Original-Received: via spool by 42701-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B42701.159698521927627
(code B ref 42701); Sun, 09 Aug 2020 15:01:01 +0000
Original-Received: (at 42701) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Aug 2020 15:00:19 +0000
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33266 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from )
id 1k4mo6-0007BW-PW
for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 09 Aug 2020 11:00:19 -0400
Original-Received: from mail-ot1-f47.google.com ([209.85.210.47]:43795)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from ) id 1k4mo2-0007BD-TD
for 42701@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 09 Aug 2020 11:00:16 -0400
Original-Received: by mail-ot1-f47.google.com with SMTP id r21so5324197ota.10
for <42701@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sun, 09 Aug 2020 08:00:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:cc; bh=hyzlnIEe8QYAexZnLI8y5Xwc7OJ4BSWLC7is8J1waM4=;
b=A4UzECvhotbXLVHGisVYXmqquNcwdyG4ewkoFzg4z+3U5rZk6HjlBlDRjuIHWNuWUc
KUeLasLeGuHL8ZvcikeZIZMaEOeFy94UBLOBOTSZwnxudW7Xm+b/mabvAIJ+JVkyXgPP
misqNCPgDVTFuK7be8jWX1oI4RgOxX2XOz/qgpERwEshp86GU38LbI3IUVk/fb8m6BtV
nU0MpCdgZuPiDE3XnnXTLxOPW2t1T/1D/3FIl3kEjjCs4UG0Ta9+i88J4OT1/P0dOB23
LL43as5b5YI/8KtqvEKzYMadXtGVhu3zpPk1AimZ13TvLfK5ep2zwFBqAkTxHAVQFXbC
sUzg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date
:message-id:subject:to:cc;
bh=hyzlnIEe8QYAexZnLI8y5Xwc7OJ4BSWLC7is8J1waM4=;
b=CJvXyCQbKJ710Ra+qFDul+MDeJbqeFVF1+D6IXrbN76zEybLnSJCsttad5pKDQPLMT
cxHsAw5jUEcqqR6O2lAZb4FTqVZd+Ag0WiqQpZLjVdG/lgDlzVTnbHEBYbe+QIUiVpbV
dfz3Oo/c2oChOkF0GbJwjmzI/FTbWdeNcpH/Cj51QGfRjyPs+sBGnnUzZRZFirwSwh2w
S0yG26s5f7KglCLSdtCFR+fbKTSs6HWY+WMYBwoG4FXN/qKrep2BudQt4RZOUc+SqQDg
G+UJMIiqsxUa7uTLQgfTvrSP9Cx3jUTV86lJaCNKupsk3LLrAT4EAFF343MMwCBNSwMn
oZPg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532bnS0E4nrY2dSnVIkTYFHAiY3oeBazi/QU/D49odCTDpowI1aC
60Hwn0Pxr9GIl+MWPwQVNEKWennzu+Bg97q/by43UjUc
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyRWjuS+dmYAt/fM5xR0hQjfT1d6gZkTrcjqNAQ0np8btaUlV+Wkyk92BXpNbT9gt3E3/sM6kz5/RhzEx+s31c=
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:170c:: with SMTP id i12mr19758329ota.36.1596985208859;
Sun, 09 Aug 2020 08:00:08 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20200804201258.73145.qmail@mail.muc.de>
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
the Swiss army knife of text editors"
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org
Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs"
Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:184429
Archived-At:
)
Am Di., 4. Aug. 2020 um 22:12 Uhr schrieb Alan Mackenzie :
>
> Hello, Philipp.
>
> In article you wrote:
>
> > Create a file /tmp/edebug.el:
>
> > $ cat /tmp/edebug.el
> > (defun f () (if-let (x (funcall (lambda (y) 1) 2)) 3 4))
>
> > Visit the file:
>
> > $ emacs -Q -l subr-x -l edebug /tmp/edebug.el
>
> > Now instrument the function `f' using C-u C-M-x. The *Messages* buffer
> > will now contain
>
> > Edebug: edebug-anon0 [2 times]
> > Edebug: f
>
> > The [2 times] indicates the problem: Edebug has instrumented two
> > definitions with the same (generated) symbol.
>
> I don't think you're correct, here. I think it's instrumented the
> lambda form twice, once for each arm of the edebug spec. It discards
> the first attempt, then succeeds at the second.
>
> The pertinent edebug spec (from the if-let definition in subr-x.el)
> looks like:
>
> ([&or (&rest [&or symbolp (symbolp form) (form)])
> (symbolp form)]
> form body)
>
> . In the outer &or sub-spec, the (&rest ....) bit doesn't match, but
> the failure to match only happens after the "Edebug: edebug-anon0"
> message has been output the first time. Edebug then tries the (symbolp
> form) alternative, which does match and outputs the "...-anon0" message
> a second time.
That is correct, but when the match fails, it's already too late:
Edebug (in `edebug-make-form-wrapper') has already performed some
global mutations such as modifying `edebug-form-data' of the `edebug'
property of the newly-generated symbol. These mutations aren't unwound
after the first failed match.
>
> > This is a problem when using Edebug for e.g. coverage instrumentation,
> > as the coverage information is attached to the symbol itself (as a
> > symbol property), and duplicate symbols when instrumenting code lead
> > to subtle errors such as mismatching vector lengths for the position
> > of the breakpoints and the hit counts.
>
> I don't think this is happening (see above), but I admit not having
> looked into it all that closely. Do you have any further evidence of
> two distinct functions being mapped onto the same generated symbol?
I've tried to provide some context in
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnu-emacs/2020-08/msg00574.html.
The most common symptom of such duplicate definitions (as defined by
"calling `edebug-make-form-wrapper' twice with the same
`edebug-def-name'") is
https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=41853.
>
> > I'd speculate that this issue is similar to Bug#41988 in that Edebug
> > defines instrumented symbols even when backtracking later. In this
> > case, Edebug backtracks to the legacy (SYM VAL) form, but has already
> > partially matched the ((SYM VAL)) form, including instrumenting the
> > lambda form therein. I guess Edebug should perform some kind of
> > two-phase instrumentation and instrument subforms only when a form has
> > been chosen after backtracking. Since this is somewhat difficult to
> > implement without rewriting larger parts of Edebug, it might be more
> > feasible to regenerate anonymous symbols after a failed match.
>
> I don't know why Edebug re-uses the symbol.
.
My guess is that `edebug-old-def-name' becomes non-nil because the
form has already been instrumented
(https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git/tree/lisp/emacs-lisp/edebug.el?id=1a845a672dc73c8e98e6cb9bb734616e168e60ba#n1382).
It's then reused in
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git/tree/lisp/emacs-lisp/edebug.el?id=1a845a672dc73c8e98e6cb9bb734616e168e60ba#n1250.
> But beyond the misleading
> double message in *Messages*, is there any harm done? Would it be less
> confusing if two distinct messages "Edebug: edebug-anon0" and "Edebug:
> edebug-anon1" were to be output?
The duplicate message is just a symptom of calling
`edebug-make-form-wrapper' twice with the same `edebug-def-name'
symbol, and attaching various instrumentation data to the symbol.
Depending on whether the two definitions are compatible, this can be
harmless or lead to subtle issues like
https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=41853. Therefore in my
coverage instrumentation driver I'm rejecting such duplicate
instrumentations
(https://github.com/phst/rules_elisp/commit/31d30e99c21027c5859782229aebb314ed3cb36c,
since it doesn't seem to be possible to predict whether the
redefinition would indeed be harmless or trigger
https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=41853.