-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.7k
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
Add managed blocking info for lock and monitor waits #101192
Conversation
- Added a managed `ThreadBlockingInfo` struct that is similar to CoreCLR's `DebugBlockingItem` - Updated `Lock`, `Condition`, and `Monitor` to record the info - The `LockOwnerOSThreadId` and `LockOwnerManagedThreadId` properties can be used by debuggers to determine which thread owns a lock that the current thread is waiting on - In CoreCLR, `Monitor` records the info using the `Monitor` object kinds. In NativeAOT, `Lock` and `Condition` are used for `Monitor` waits, so the object kinds would be `Lock/Condition`. For now, Mono's `Monitor` does not record this info.
Tagging subscribers to this area: @mangod9 |
Is there an issue/rationale for making these classes managed? Just curious |
It's a bit easier to track this info in a managed surface when the types involved are managed (eg. |
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.
LGTM. Have the VS folks confirmed they can work with this?
|
||
// This is the equivalent of the managed ThreadBlockingInfo (see ThreadBlockingInfo.cs), which is used for tracking blocking | ||
// info from the managed side, similarly to DebugBlockingItem | ||
struct ThreadBlockingInfo |
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.
Do we need a 2nd definition of these types? Could we update DebugBlockingItem and DebugBlockingItemType to match instead?
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.
The current definition appears to be used by debugger APIs to enumerate the blocking items. It seems there would need to be a second object on the stack for maintaining a separate linked list that contains info only about Monitor blocking, as the current APIs to get info from a blocking object would not work with Lock. I was thinking it might be easier to remove the current definitions in the future after debuggers switch to using the managed surface, and maybe deprecate some of the relevant debugger APIs. Thoughts?
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.
The types that get exposed publicly should be CorDebugBlockingObject and CorDebugBlockingReason in the ICorDebug interface. The types exposed in the DAC IDacDbiInterface are not public and can be changed as needed. The code to convert from the internal to public types occurs here:
runtime/src/coreclr/debug/di/rsthread.cpp
Line 2750 in d92ac1f
SIZE_T dacObjIndex = dacBlockingObjects.Size()-i-1; |
However if we removed the domain field off the internal type we'd have to repopulate it from somewhere else and it looks like we've never done the work to convert ICorDebug to understand that CoreCLR just has a single AppDomain. Its probably not that hard, but I wouldn't feel right asking you to do that refactoring when the ground work isn't there yet. So I'd say lets not worry about this, it was just a potential for some minor deduplication.
In terms of deprecation we've rarely ever done it in the past but it is possible if supporting the old APIs is ongoing hassle and we've allowed some time to pass so that the new API is easily available. I'd think next release at the earliest unless there is some pressing need. We'd need to remove the usage from our tests, remove code from the runtime, and put out notifications of the breaking change. Thanks Kount!
Someone from their team has taken a look and confirmed that it looks ok for them to proceed with. |
* Add managed blocking info for lock and monitor waits - Added a managed `ThreadBlockingInfo` struct that is similar to CoreCLR's `DebugBlockingItem` - Updated `Lock`, `Condition`, and `Monitor` to record the info - The `LockOwnerOSThreadId` and `LockOwnerManagedThreadId` properties can be used by debuggers to determine which thread owns a lock that the current thread is waiting on - In CoreCLR, `Monitor` records the info using the `Monitor` object kinds. In NativeAOT, `Lock` and `Condition` are used for `Monitor` waits, so the object kinds would be `Lock/Condition`. For now, Mono's `Monitor` does not record this info.
* Add managed blocking info for lock and monitor waits - Added a managed `ThreadBlockingInfo` struct that is similar to CoreCLR's `DebugBlockingItem` - Updated `Lock`, `Condition`, and `Monitor` to record the info - The `LockOwnerOSThreadId` and `LockOwnerManagedThreadId` properties can be used by debuggers to determine which thread owns a lock that the current thread is waiting on - In CoreCLR, `Monitor` records the info using the `Monitor` object kinds. In NativeAOT, `Lock` and `Condition` are used for `Monitor` waits, so the object kinds would be `Lock/Condition`. For now, Mono's `Monitor` does not record this info.
ThreadBlockingInfo
struct that is similar to CoreCLR'sDebugBlockingItem
Lock
,Condition
, andMonitor
to record the infoLockOwnerOSThreadId
andLockOwnerManagedThreadId
properties can be used by debuggers to determine which thread owns a lock that the current thread is waiting onMonitor
records the info using theMonitor
object kinds. In NativeAOT,Lock
andCondition
are used forMonitor
waits, so the object kinds would beLock/Condition
. For now, Mono'sMonitor
does not record this info.