baseprofiler/core/ProfileBufferEntry.cpp#627 : printf("%#llx") doesn't output "0x<number>" anymore
Categories
(Core :: Gecko Profiler, defect, P1)
Tracking
()
| Tracking | Status | |
|---|---|---|
| firefox-esr78 | --- | unaffected |
| firefox88 | --- | wontfix |
| firefox89 | --- | fixed |
| firefox90 | --- | fixed |
People
(Reporter: mozbugz, Assigned: mozbugz)
References
(Regression)
Details
(Keywords: regression)
Attachments
(1 file)
|
48 bytes,
text/x-phabricator-request
|
RyanVM
:
approval-mozilla-beta+
|
Details | Review |
This makes baseprofiler native stacks look like "%#llx" without address.
| Assignee | ||
Comment 1•4 years ago
|
||
| Assignee | ||
Comment 2•4 years ago
•
|
||
Actually, '#' was valid, and allowed "alternative" representations, in this case it used to add the "0x" prefix.
But I won't chase what happened with printf. I'll just remove '#' and add the explicit "0x", it Works For Me™.
| Assignee | ||
Comment 3•4 years ago
|
||
Before: https://share.firefox.dev/2RaSPcZ (shows "%#llx")
Without '#': https://share.firefox.dev/2RaSPcZ (shows naked addresses)
With "0x": https://share.firefox.dev/3y3uwhz (shows function names) 🎉
| Assignee | ||
Updated•4 years ago
|
Updated•4 years ago
|
Comment 5•4 years ago
|
||
Set release status flags based on info from the regressing bug 1690167
Updated•4 years ago
|
Comment 6•4 years ago
|
||
| bugherder | ||
| Assignee | ||
Comment 7•4 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 9221469 [details]
Bug 1710757 - Fix baseprofiler native-frame output - r?florian
Beta/Release Uplift Approval Request
- User impact if declined: Users of the Firefox Profiler will get less-useful startup profiles.
- Is this code covered by automated tests?: No
- Has the fix been verified in Nightly?: Yes
- Needs manual test from QE?: No
- If yes, steps to reproduce:
- List of other uplifts needed: None
- Risk to taking this patch: Low
- Why is the change risky/not risky? (and alternatives if risky): Not risky: It's only changing a printf format argument.
- String changes made/needed:
| Assignee | ||
Comment 8•4 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Gerald Squelart [:gerald] (he/him) from comment #7)
- Is this code covered by automated tests?: No
To be more precise: We have automated tests that run this code, so I'm confident it doesn't crash or makes profiles worse, but the tests don't check for the exact output of this line -- Which is why we didn't catch the regression.
Updated•4 years ago
|
Comment 9•4 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 9221469 [details]
Bug 1710757 - Fix baseprofiler native-frame output - r?florian
Approved for 89.0b12.
Comment 10•4 years ago
|
||
| bugherder uplift | ||
Description
•