Skip to content

Fix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for mono - #82376

Merged
stephentoub merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
stephentoub:fixmonosafehandle
Feb 28, 2023
Merged

Fix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for mono#82376
stephentoub merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
stephentoub:fixmonosafehandle

Conversation

@stephentoub

@stephentoubstephentoub commented Feb 20, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Try to fix mono failure
Fixes#82308

@build-analysisbuild-analysisBot mentioned this pull request Feb 20, 2023
Open
5 tasks
@stephentoubstephentoub added the NO-REVIEW Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it label Feb 20, 2023
@stephentoubstephentoub changed the title Move SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace to not be first fieldFix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for monoFeb 21, 2023
@stephentoubstephentoub removed the NO-REVIEW Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it label Feb 21, 2023
This was referenced Feb 21, 2023
Closed
Closed
@stephentoub

stephentoub commented Feb 23, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

/azp list

@azure-pipelines

azure-pipelinesBot commented Feb 23, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
CI/CD Pipelines for this repository:

@stephentoub

stephentoub commented Feb 23, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

/azp run runtime-community

@azure-pipelines

azure-pipelinesBot commented Feb 23, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@stephentoub

stephentoub commented Feb 23, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

/azp run runtime-extra-platforms

@azure-pipelines

azure-pipelinesBot commented Feb 23, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

lambdageek
lambdageek reviewed Feb 23, 2023
View reviewed changes

@lambdageeklambdageek left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is technically fine, but maybe we should do something a bit cleaner.

Also I really think we need

#if MONO[StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)]
#endif

Comment threadsrc/libraries/System.Private.CoreLib/src/System/Runtime/InteropServices/SafeHandle.cs
Comment on lines +31 to 33
#if DEBUG && CORECLR
private readonly string? _ctorStackTrace;
#endif

@lambdageeklambdageekFeb 23, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@stephentoub questions:

  1. Can we move this member to the end of the set of instance members. (And I assume do the related changes on the native side in coreclr)
  2. For Mono we should really have [StructLayout(Sequential)] on any class where we care about the field layout. Otherwise we're just relying on auto layout coincidentally getting the fields in the right order.
  3. Should we make SafeHandle.Mono.cs and SafeHandle.CoreCLR.cs that just contain the instance field definitions? #if DEBUG && CORECLR accomplishes the same thing but feels more fragile.

@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 23, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can we move this member to the end of the set of instance members. (And I assume do the related changes on the native side in coreclr)

I'd previously done that, and I believe the issues I hit were to do with alignment, though it's also possible I just messed something up or neglected to edit something I needed to edit.

For Mono we should really have [StructLayout(Sequential)] on any class where we care about the field layout. Otherwise we're just relying on auto layout coincidentally getting the fields in the right order.

This is irrespective of this change or this field, right? You're saying mono is expecting that handle is first and it may not be.

Should we make SafeHandle.Mono.cs and SafeHandle.CoreCLR.cs that just contain the instance field definitions? #if DEBUG && CORECLR accomplishes the same thing but feels more fragile.

I don't love the duplication there; that feels more fragile to me, actually. If this field is problematic, we can just remove it and I can put it back in the future should someone want to do another push like I did to drive down SafeHandle finalization debt.

@lambdageeklambdageekFeb 23, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is irrespective of this change or this field, right? You're saying mono is expecting that handle is first and it may not be.

Yea, it's not required for this PR (all the other fields are non-reference so auto layout will get things right). Just might as well do some future-proofing

@lambdageeklambdageekFeb 23, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Overall I'm fine with the PR as is. It would be nice to get the layout attribute in here, but we could also do a separate PR for that. If splitting the file feels more fragile to you @stephentoub , I'm ok with the PR as is.

@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 28, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@lambdageek, mono actually already has StructLayout applied:

runtime/src/mono/System.Private.CoreLib/src/System/Runtime/InteropServices/SafeHandle.Mono.cs

Lines 6 to 8 in 5e3dd8d

// Mono runtime relies on exact layout
[StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)]
publicabstractpartialclassSafeHandle

@stephentoub
stephentoub merged commit 5e3dd8d into dotnet:mainFeb 28, 2023
@stephentoub
stephentoub deleted the fixmonosafehandle branch February 28, 2023 22:43
@ghostghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Mar 31, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Reviewers

@lambdageeklambdageeklambdageek approved these changes

Assignees

@stephentoubstephentoub

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

SafeHandle marshalling broken with Mono

2 participants

@stephentoub@lambdageek
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Add copy buttons to all 
 blocks
(function() {
function addCopyButtons() {
document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {
if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;
codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');
var btn = document.createElement('button');
btn.textContent = 'Copy';
btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';
btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };
btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };
btn.onclick = function() {
navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {
btn.textContent = 'Copied!';
setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);
});
};
codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';
codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);
});
}
addCopyButtons();
// Re-run on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '
Fix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for mono by stephentoub · Pull Request #82376 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
Fix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for mono - #82376
Merged
stephentoub merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
stephentoub:fixmonosafehandle
Feb 28, 2023
Merged
Fix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for mono#82376
stephentoub merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
stephentoub:fixmonosafehandle
Conversation
@stephentoub
@stephentoubstephentoub
commented
Feb 20, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Try to fix mono failure
Fixes#82308
@build-analysisbuild-analysisBot
mentioned this pull request
Feb 20, 2023

Open

5 tasks
@stephentoubstephentoub
added
the 
NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
label
Feb 20, 2023
@stephentoubstephentoub
changed the title
Move SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace to not be first fieldFix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for monoFeb 21, 2023
@stephentoubstephentoub
removed
the 
NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
label
Feb 21, 2023

This was referenced Feb 21, 2023

Closed


Closed

@stephentoub
stephentoub
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/azp list
@azure-pipelines
azure-pipelinesBot
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown


CI/CD Pipelines for this repository:
@stephentoub
stephentoub
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/azp run runtime-community
@azure-pipelines
azure-pipelinesBot
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown


Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).
@stephentoub
stephentoub
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/azp run runtime-extra-platforms
@azure-pipelines
azure-pipelinesBot
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown


Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).
lambdageek
lambdageek
reviewed
Feb 23, 2023
View reviewed changes
@lambdageeklambdageek
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is technically fine, but maybe we should do something a bit cleaner.
Also I really think we need
#if MONO[StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)]
#endif
Comment threadsrc/libraries/System.Private.CoreLib/src/System/Runtime/InteropServices/SafeHandle.cs

Comment on lines

+31
 to 
33

#if DEBUG && CORECLR
 private readonly string? _ctorStackTrace;
#endif
@lambdageeklambdageekFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@stephentoub questions:
  1. Can we move this member to the end of the set of instance members. (And I assume do the related changes on the native side in coreclr)
  2. For Mono we should really have [StructLayout(Sequential)] on any class where we care about the field layout. Otherwise we're just relying on auto layout coincidentally getting the fields in the right order.
  3. Should we make SafeHandle.Mono.cs and SafeHandle.CoreCLR.cs that just contain the instance field definitions? #if DEBUG && CORECLR accomplishes the same thing but feels more fragile.
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can we move this member to the end of the set of instance members. (And I assume do the related changes on the native side in coreclr)
I'd previously done that, and I believe the issues I hit were to do with alignment, though it's also possible I just messed something up or neglected to edit something I needed to edit.
For Mono we should really have [StructLayout(Sequential)] on any class where we care about the field layout. Otherwise we're just relying on auto layout coincidentally getting the fields in the right order.
This is irrespective of this change or this field, right? You're saying mono is expecting that handle is first and it may not be.
Should we make SafeHandle.Mono.cs and SafeHandle.CoreCLR.cs that just contain the instance field definitions? #if DEBUG && CORECLR accomplishes the same thing but feels more fragile.
I don't love the duplication there; that feels more fragile to me, actually. If this field is problematic, we can just remove it and I can put it back in the future should someone want to do another push like I did to drive down SafeHandle finalization debt.
@lambdageeklambdageekFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is irrespective of this change or this field, right? You're saying mono is expecting that handle is first and it may not be.
Yea, it's not required for this PR (all the other fields are non-reference so auto layout will get things right). Just might as well do some future-proofing
@lambdageeklambdageekFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Overall I'm fine with the PR as is. It would be nice to get the layout attribute in here, but we could also do a separate PR for that. If splitting the file feels more fragile to you @stephentoub , I'm ok with the PR as is.
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 28, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@lambdageek, mono actually already has StructLayout applied:
runtime/src/mono/System.Private.CoreLib/src/System/Runtime/InteropServices/SafeHandle.Mono.cs

Lines 6 to 8
in
5e3dd8d
// Mono runtime relies on exact layout
[StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)]
publicabstractpartialclassSafeHandle
@stephentoub
stephentoub
merged commit 5e3dd8d
into
dotnet:mainFeb 28, 2023
@stephentoub
stephentoub
deleted the

fixmonosafehandle

branch
February 28, 2023 22:43
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Mar 31, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@lambdageeklambdageeklambdageek approved these changes

Assignees

@stephentoubstephentoub

Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

SafeHandle marshalling broken with Mono


2 participants

@stephentoub@lambdageek

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode
(function() {
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '
.markdown-body {
color-scheme: dark light;
}
.markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }
.markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }
.markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }
.markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }
.markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }
.markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }
';
document.head.appendChild(style);
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Fix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for mono by stephentoub · Pull Request #82376 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
Fix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for mono - #82376
Merged
stephentoub merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
stephentoub:fixmonosafehandle
Feb 28, 2023
Merged
Fix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for mono#82376
stephentoub merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
stephentoub:fixmonosafehandle
Conversation
@stephentoub
@stephentoubstephentoub
commented
Feb 20, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Try to fix mono failure
Fixes#82308
@build-analysisbuild-analysisBot
mentioned this pull request
Feb 20, 2023

Open

5 tasks
@stephentoubstephentoub
added
the 
NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
label
Feb 20, 2023
@stephentoubstephentoub
changed the title
Move SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace to not be first fieldFix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for monoFeb 21, 2023
@stephentoubstephentoub
removed
the 
NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
label
Feb 21, 2023

This was referenced Feb 21, 2023

Closed


Closed

@stephentoub
stephentoub
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/azp list
@azure-pipelines
azure-pipelinesBot
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown


CI/CD Pipelines for this repository:
@stephentoub
stephentoub
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/azp run runtime-community
@azure-pipelines
azure-pipelinesBot
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown


Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).
@stephentoub
stephentoub
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/azp run runtime-extra-platforms
@azure-pipelines
azure-pipelinesBot
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown


Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).
lambdageek
lambdageek
reviewed
Feb 23, 2023
View reviewed changes
@lambdageeklambdageek
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is technically fine, but maybe we should do something a bit cleaner.
Also I really think we need
#if MONO[StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)]
#endif
Comment threadsrc/libraries/System.Private.CoreLib/src/System/Runtime/InteropServices/SafeHandle.cs

Comment on lines

+31
 to 
33

#if DEBUG && CORECLR
 private readonly string? _ctorStackTrace;
#endif
@lambdageeklambdageekFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@stephentoub questions:
  1. Can we move this member to the end of the set of instance members. (And I assume do the related changes on the native side in coreclr)
  2. For Mono we should really have [StructLayout(Sequential)] on any class where we care about the field layout. Otherwise we're just relying on auto layout coincidentally getting the fields in the right order.
  3. Should we make SafeHandle.Mono.cs and SafeHandle.CoreCLR.cs that just contain the instance field definitions? #if DEBUG && CORECLR accomplishes the same thing but feels more fragile.
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can we move this member to the end of the set of instance members. (And I assume do the related changes on the native side in coreclr)
I'd previously done that, and I believe the issues I hit were to do with alignment, though it's also possible I just messed something up or neglected to edit something I needed to edit.
For Mono we should really have [StructLayout(Sequential)] on any class where we care about the field layout. Otherwise we're just relying on auto layout coincidentally getting the fields in the right order.
This is irrespective of this change or this field, right? You're saying mono is expecting that handle is first and it may not be.
Should we make SafeHandle.Mono.cs and SafeHandle.CoreCLR.cs that just contain the instance field definitions? #if DEBUG && CORECLR accomplishes the same thing but feels more fragile.
I don't love the duplication there; that feels more fragile to me, actually. If this field is problematic, we can just remove it and I can put it back in the future should someone want to do another push like I did to drive down SafeHandle finalization debt.
@lambdageeklambdageekFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is irrespective of this change or this field, right? You're saying mono is expecting that handle is first and it may not be.
Yea, it's not required for this PR (all the other fields are non-reference so auto layout will get things right). Just might as well do some future-proofing
@lambdageeklambdageekFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Overall I'm fine with the PR as is. It would be nice to get the layout attribute in here, but we could also do a separate PR for that. If splitting the file feels more fragile to you @stephentoub , I'm ok with the PR as is.
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 28, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@lambdageek, mono actually already has StructLayout applied:
runtime/src/mono/System.Private.CoreLib/src/System/Runtime/InteropServices/SafeHandle.Mono.cs

Lines 6 to 8
in
5e3dd8d
// Mono runtime relies on exact layout
[StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)]
publicabstractpartialclassSafeHandle
@stephentoub
stephentoub
merged commit 5e3dd8d
into
dotnet:mainFeb 28, 2023
@stephentoub
stephentoub
deleted the

fixmonosafehandle

branch
February 28, 2023 22:43
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Mar 31, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@lambdageeklambdageeklambdageek approved these changes

Assignees

@stephentoubstephentoub

Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

SafeHandle marshalling broken with Mono


2 participants

@stephentoub@lambdageek

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer
(function() {
var ref = document.referrer;
var terms = [];
if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {
var url = new URL(ref);
var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');
if (q) {
terms = q.split(/\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });
}
}
if (terms.length === 0) return;
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';
document.head.appendChild(style);
function highlight(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node
var text = node.textContent;
var found = false;
terms.forEach(function(term) {
var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\]\\]/g, '\\') + ')', 'gi');
if (regex.test(text)) {
found = true;
var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();
var parts = text.split(regex);
parts.forEach(function(part, i) {
if (i % 2 === 0) {
frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));
} else {
var span = document.createElement('span');
span.className = 'userscript-highlight';
span.textContent = part;
frag.appendChild(span);
}
});
node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);
}
});
} else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element
var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];
if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {
Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);
}
}
}
highlight(document.body);
// Re-highlight on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Fix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for mono by stephentoub · Pull Request #82376 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
Fix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for mono - #82376
Merged
stephentoub merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
stephentoub:fixmonosafehandle
Feb 28, 2023
Merged
Fix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for mono#82376
stephentoub merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
stephentoub:fixmonosafehandle
Conversation
@stephentoub
@stephentoubstephentoub
commented
Feb 20, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Try to fix mono failure
Fixes#82308
@build-analysisbuild-analysisBot
mentioned this pull request
Feb 20, 2023

Open

5 tasks
@stephentoubstephentoub
added
the 
NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
label
Feb 20, 2023
@stephentoubstephentoub
changed the title
Move SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace to not be first fieldFix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for monoFeb 21, 2023
@stephentoubstephentoub
removed
the 
NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
label
Feb 21, 2023

This was referenced Feb 21, 2023

Closed


Closed

@stephentoub
stephentoub
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/azp list
@azure-pipelines
azure-pipelinesBot
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown


CI/CD Pipelines for this repository:
@stephentoub
stephentoub
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/azp run runtime-community
@azure-pipelines
azure-pipelinesBot
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown


Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).
@stephentoub
stephentoub
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/azp run runtime-extra-platforms
@azure-pipelines
azure-pipelinesBot
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown


Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).
lambdageek
lambdageek
reviewed
Feb 23, 2023
View reviewed changes
@lambdageeklambdageek
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is technically fine, but maybe we should do something a bit cleaner.
Also I really think we need
#if MONO[StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)]
#endif
Comment threadsrc/libraries/System.Private.CoreLib/src/System/Runtime/InteropServices/SafeHandle.cs

Comment on lines

+31
 to 
33

#if DEBUG && CORECLR
 private readonly string? _ctorStackTrace;
#endif
@lambdageeklambdageekFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@stephentoub questions:
  1. Can we move this member to the end of the set of instance members. (And I assume do the related changes on the native side in coreclr)
  2. For Mono we should really have [StructLayout(Sequential)] on any class where we care about the field layout. Otherwise we're just relying on auto layout coincidentally getting the fields in the right order.
  3. Should we make SafeHandle.Mono.cs and SafeHandle.CoreCLR.cs that just contain the instance field definitions? #if DEBUG && CORECLR accomplishes the same thing but feels more fragile.
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can we move this member to the end of the set of instance members. (And I assume do the related changes on the native side in coreclr)
I'd previously done that, and I believe the issues I hit were to do with alignment, though it's also possible I just messed something up or neglected to edit something I needed to edit.
For Mono we should really have [StructLayout(Sequential)] on any class where we care about the field layout. Otherwise we're just relying on auto layout coincidentally getting the fields in the right order.
This is irrespective of this change or this field, right? You're saying mono is expecting that handle is first and it may not be.
Should we make SafeHandle.Mono.cs and SafeHandle.CoreCLR.cs that just contain the instance field definitions? #if DEBUG && CORECLR accomplishes the same thing but feels more fragile.
I don't love the duplication there; that feels more fragile to me, actually. If this field is problematic, we can just remove it and I can put it back in the future should someone want to do another push like I did to drive down SafeHandle finalization debt.
@lambdageeklambdageekFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is irrespective of this change or this field, right? You're saying mono is expecting that handle is first and it may not be.
Yea, it's not required for this PR (all the other fields are non-reference so auto layout will get things right). Just might as well do some future-proofing
@lambdageeklambdageekFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Overall I'm fine with the PR as is. It would be nice to get the layout attribute in here, but we could also do a separate PR for that. If splitting the file feels more fragile to you @stephentoub , I'm ok with the PR as is.
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 28, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@lambdageek, mono actually already has StructLayout applied:
runtime/src/mono/System.Private.CoreLib/src/System/Runtime/InteropServices/SafeHandle.Mono.cs

Lines 6 to 8
in
5e3dd8d
// Mono runtime relies on exact layout
[StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)]
publicabstractpartialclassSafeHandle
@stephentoub
stephentoub
merged commit 5e3dd8d
into
dotnet:mainFeb 28, 2023
@stephentoub
stephentoub
deleted the

fixmonosafehandle

branch
February 28, 2023 22:43
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Mar 31, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@lambdageeklambdageeklambdageek approved these changes

Assignees

@stephentoubstephentoub

Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

SafeHandle marshalling broken with Mono


2 participants

@stephentoub@lambdageek

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page
(function() {
var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',
'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',
'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];
function cleanUrl(url) {
try {
var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);
var changed = false;
trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {
if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {
u.searchParams.delete(p);
changed = true;
}
});
return changed ? u.toString() : url;
} catch (e) {
return url;
}
}
function cleanLinks() {
document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
cleanLinks();
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1) {
if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();
node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "youtube.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '
Fix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for mono by stephentoub · Pull Request #82376 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
Fix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for mono - #82376
Merged
stephentoub merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
stephentoub:fixmonosafehandle
Feb 28, 2023
Merged
Fix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for mono#82376
stephentoub merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
stephentoub:fixmonosafehandle
Conversation
@stephentoub
@stephentoubstephentoub
commented
Feb 20, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Try to fix mono failure
Fixes#82308
@build-analysisbuild-analysisBot
mentioned this pull request
Feb 20, 2023

Open

5 tasks
@stephentoubstephentoub
added
the 
NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
label
Feb 20, 2023
@stephentoubstephentoub
changed the title
Move SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace to not be first fieldFix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for monoFeb 21, 2023
@stephentoubstephentoub
removed
the 
NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
label
Feb 21, 2023

This was referenced Feb 21, 2023

Closed


Closed

@stephentoub
stephentoub
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/azp list
@azure-pipelines
azure-pipelinesBot
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown


CI/CD Pipelines for this repository:
@stephentoub
stephentoub
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/azp run runtime-community
@azure-pipelines
azure-pipelinesBot
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown


Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).
@stephentoub
stephentoub
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/azp run runtime-extra-platforms
@azure-pipelines
azure-pipelinesBot
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown


Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).
lambdageek
lambdageek
reviewed
Feb 23, 2023
View reviewed changes
@lambdageeklambdageek
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is technically fine, but maybe we should do something a bit cleaner.
Also I really think we need
#if MONO[StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)]
#endif
Comment threadsrc/libraries/System.Private.CoreLib/src/System/Runtime/InteropServices/SafeHandle.cs

Comment on lines

+31
 to 
33

#if DEBUG && CORECLR
 private readonly string? _ctorStackTrace;
#endif
@lambdageeklambdageekFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@stephentoub questions:
  1. Can we move this member to the end of the set of instance members. (And I assume do the related changes on the native side in coreclr)
  2. For Mono we should really have [StructLayout(Sequential)] on any class where we care about the field layout. Otherwise we're just relying on auto layout coincidentally getting the fields in the right order.
  3. Should we make SafeHandle.Mono.cs and SafeHandle.CoreCLR.cs that just contain the instance field definitions? #if DEBUG && CORECLR accomplishes the same thing but feels more fragile.
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can we move this member to the end of the set of instance members. (And I assume do the related changes on the native side in coreclr)
I'd previously done that, and I believe the issues I hit were to do with alignment, though it's also possible I just messed something up or neglected to edit something I needed to edit.
For Mono we should really have [StructLayout(Sequential)] on any class where we care about the field layout. Otherwise we're just relying on auto layout coincidentally getting the fields in the right order.
This is irrespective of this change or this field, right? You're saying mono is expecting that handle is first and it may not be.
Should we make SafeHandle.Mono.cs and SafeHandle.CoreCLR.cs that just contain the instance field definitions? #if DEBUG && CORECLR accomplishes the same thing but feels more fragile.
I don't love the duplication there; that feels more fragile to me, actually. If this field is problematic, we can just remove it and I can put it back in the future should someone want to do another push like I did to drive down SafeHandle finalization debt.
@lambdageeklambdageekFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is irrespective of this change or this field, right? You're saying mono is expecting that handle is first and it may not be.
Yea, it's not required for this PR (all the other fields are non-reference so auto layout will get things right). Just might as well do some future-proofing
@lambdageeklambdageekFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Overall I'm fine with the PR as is. It would be nice to get the layout attribute in here, but we could also do a separate PR for that. If splitting the file feels more fragile to you @stephentoub , I'm ok with the PR as is.
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 28, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@lambdageek, mono actually already has StructLayout applied:
runtime/src/mono/System.Private.CoreLib/src/System/Runtime/InteropServices/SafeHandle.Mono.cs

Lines 6 to 8
in
5e3dd8d
// Mono runtime relies on exact layout
[StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)]
publicabstractpartialclassSafeHandle
@stephentoub
stephentoub
merged commit 5e3dd8d
into
dotnet:mainFeb 28, 2023
@stephentoub
stephentoub
deleted the

fixmonosafehandle

branch
February 28, 2023 22:43
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Mar 31, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@lambdageeklambdageeklambdageek approved these changes

Assignees

@stephentoubstephentoub

Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

SafeHandle marshalling broken with Mono


2 participants

@stephentoub@lambdageek

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube
(function() {
function tryTheater() {
var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label="Theater mode"], ytd-player #player button[title="Theater mode"]');
if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {
btn.click();
}
}
// Try immediately
tryTheater();
// Try after navigation (SPA)
var lastUrl = location.href;
setInterval(function() {
if (location.href !== lastUrl) {
lastUrl = location.href;
setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);
}
}, 1000);
// Also try on player load
var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Fix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for mono by stephentoub · Pull Request #82376 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
Fix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for mono - #82376
Merged
stephentoub merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
stephentoub:fixmonosafehandle
Feb 28, 2023
Merged
Fix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for mono#82376
stephentoub merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
stephentoub:fixmonosafehandle
Conversation
@stephentoub
@stephentoubstephentoub
commented
Feb 20, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Try to fix mono failure
Fixes#82308
@build-analysisbuild-analysisBot
mentioned this pull request
Feb 20, 2023

Open

5 tasks
@stephentoubstephentoub
added
the 
NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
label
Feb 20, 2023
@stephentoubstephentoub
changed the title
Move SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace to not be first fieldFix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for monoFeb 21, 2023
@stephentoubstephentoub
removed
the 
NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
label
Feb 21, 2023

This was referenced Feb 21, 2023

Closed


Closed

@stephentoub
stephentoub
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/azp list
@azure-pipelines
azure-pipelinesBot
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown


CI/CD Pipelines for this repository:
@stephentoub
stephentoub
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/azp run runtime-community
@azure-pipelines
azure-pipelinesBot
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown


Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).
@stephentoub
stephentoub
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/azp run runtime-extra-platforms
@azure-pipelines
azure-pipelinesBot
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown


Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).
lambdageek
lambdageek
reviewed
Feb 23, 2023
View reviewed changes
@lambdageeklambdageek
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is technically fine, but maybe we should do something a bit cleaner.
Also I really think we need
#if MONO[StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)]
#endif
Comment threadsrc/libraries/System.Private.CoreLib/src/System/Runtime/InteropServices/SafeHandle.cs

Comment on lines

+31
 to 
33

#if DEBUG && CORECLR
 private readonly string? _ctorStackTrace;
#endif
@lambdageeklambdageekFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@stephentoub questions:
  1. Can we move this member to the end of the set of instance members. (And I assume do the related changes on the native side in coreclr)
  2. For Mono we should really have [StructLayout(Sequential)] on any class where we care about the field layout. Otherwise we're just relying on auto layout coincidentally getting the fields in the right order.
  3. Should we make SafeHandle.Mono.cs and SafeHandle.CoreCLR.cs that just contain the instance field definitions? #if DEBUG && CORECLR accomplishes the same thing but feels more fragile.
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can we move this member to the end of the set of instance members. (And I assume do the related changes on the native side in coreclr)
I'd previously done that, and I believe the issues I hit were to do with alignment, though it's also possible I just messed something up or neglected to edit something I needed to edit.
For Mono we should really have [StructLayout(Sequential)] on any class where we care about the field layout. Otherwise we're just relying on auto layout coincidentally getting the fields in the right order.
This is irrespective of this change or this field, right? You're saying mono is expecting that handle is first and it may not be.
Should we make SafeHandle.Mono.cs and SafeHandle.CoreCLR.cs that just contain the instance field definitions? #if DEBUG && CORECLR accomplishes the same thing but feels more fragile.
I don't love the duplication there; that feels more fragile to me, actually. If this field is problematic, we can just remove it and I can put it back in the future should someone want to do another push like I did to drive down SafeHandle finalization debt.
@lambdageeklambdageekFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is irrespective of this change or this field, right? You're saying mono is expecting that handle is first and it may not be.
Yea, it's not required for this PR (all the other fields are non-reference so auto layout will get things right). Just might as well do some future-proofing
@lambdageeklambdageekFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Overall I'm fine with the PR as is. It would be nice to get the layout attribute in here, but we could also do a separate PR for that. If splitting the file feels more fragile to you @stephentoub , I'm ok with the PR as is.
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 28, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@lambdageek, mono actually already has StructLayout applied:
runtime/src/mono/System.Private.CoreLib/src/System/Runtime/InteropServices/SafeHandle.Mono.cs

Lines 6 to 8
in
5e3dd8d
// Mono runtime relies on exact layout
[StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)]
publicabstractpartialclassSafeHandle
@stephentoub
stephentoub
merged commit 5e3dd8d
into
dotnet:mainFeb 28, 2023
@stephentoub
stephentoub
deleted the

fixmonosafehandle

branch
February 28, 2023 22:43
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Mar 31, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@lambdageeklambdageeklambdageek approved these changes

Assignees

@stephentoubstephentoub

Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

SafeHandle marshalling broken with Mono


2 participants

@stephentoub@lambdageek

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content
(function() {
function unstick() {
document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role="banner"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*="position: fixed"], [style*="position:sticky"]').forEach(function(el) {
if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {
el.style.position = 'static';
el.style.top = 'auto';
el.style.zIndex = 'auto';
}
});
}
unstick();
var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Fix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for mono by stephentoub · Pull Request #82376 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
Fix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for mono - #82376
Merged
stephentoub merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
stephentoub:fixmonosafehandle
Feb 28, 2023
Merged
Fix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for mono#82376
stephentoub merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
stephentoub:fixmonosafehandle
Conversation
@stephentoub
@stephentoubstephentoub
commented
Feb 20, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Try to fix mono failure
Fixes#82308
@build-analysisbuild-analysisBot
mentioned this pull request
Feb 20, 2023

Open

5 tasks
@stephentoubstephentoub
added
the 
NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
label
Feb 20, 2023
@stephentoubstephentoub
changed the title
Move SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace to not be first fieldFix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for monoFeb 21, 2023
@stephentoubstephentoub
removed
the 
NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
label
Feb 21, 2023

This was referenced Feb 21, 2023

Closed


Closed

@stephentoub
stephentoub
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/azp list
@azure-pipelines
azure-pipelinesBot
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown


CI/CD Pipelines for this repository:
@stephentoub
stephentoub
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/azp run runtime-community
@azure-pipelines
azure-pipelinesBot
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown


Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).
@stephentoub
stephentoub
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/azp run runtime-extra-platforms
@azure-pipelines
azure-pipelinesBot
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown


Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).
lambdageek
lambdageek
reviewed
Feb 23, 2023
View reviewed changes
@lambdageeklambdageek
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is technically fine, but maybe we should do something a bit cleaner.
Also I really think we need
#if MONO[StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)]
#endif
Comment threadsrc/libraries/System.Private.CoreLib/src/System/Runtime/InteropServices/SafeHandle.cs

Comment on lines

+31
 to 
33

#if DEBUG && CORECLR
 private readonly string? _ctorStackTrace;
#endif
@lambdageeklambdageekFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@stephentoub questions:
  1. Can we move this member to the end of the set of instance members. (And I assume do the related changes on the native side in coreclr)
  2. For Mono we should really have [StructLayout(Sequential)] on any class where we care about the field layout. Otherwise we're just relying on auto layout coincidentally getting the fields in the right order.
  3. Should we make SafeHandle.Mono.cs and SafeHandle.CoreCLR.cs that just contain the instance field definitions? #if DEBUG && CORECLR accomplishes the same thing but feels more fragile.
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can we move this member to the end of the set of instance members. (And I assume do the related changes on the native side in coreclr)
I'd previously done that, and I believe the issues I hit were to do with alignment, though it's also possible I just messed something up or neglected to edit something I needed to edit.
For Mono we should really have [StructLayout(Sequential)] on any class where we care about the field layout. Otherwise we're just relying on auto layout coincidentally getting the fields in the right order.
This is irrespective of this change or this field, right? You're saying mono is expecting that handle is first and it may not be.
Should we make SafeHandle.Mono.cs and SafeHandle.CoreCLR.cs that just contain the instance field definitions? #if DEBUG && CORECLR accomplishes the same thing but feels more fragile.
I don't love the duplication there; that feels more fragile to me, actually. If this field is problematic, we can just remove it and I can put it back in the future should someone want to do another push like I did to drive down SafeHandle finalization debt.
@lambdageeklambdageekFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is irrespective of this change or this field, right? You're saying mono is expecting that handle is first and it may not be.
Yea, it's not required for this PR (all the other fields are non-reference so auto layout will get things right). Just might as well do some future-proofing
@lambdageeklambdageekFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Overall I'm fine with the PR as is. It would be nice to get the layout attribute in here, but we could also do a separate PR for that. If splitting the file feels more fragile to you @stephentoub , I'm ok with the PR as is.
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 28, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@lambdageek, mono actually already has StructLayout applied:
runtime/src/mono/System.Private.CoreLib/src/System/Runtime/InteropServices/SafeHandle.Mono.cs

Lines 6 to 8
in
5e3dd8d
// Mono runtime relies on exact layout
[StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)]
publicabstractpartialclassSafeHandle
@stephentoub
stephentoub
merged commit 5e3dd8d
into
dotnet:mainFeb 28, 2023
@stephentoub
stephentoub
deleted the

fixmonosafehandle

branch
February 28, 2023 22:43
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Mar 31, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@lambdageeklambdageeklambdageek approved these changes

Assignees

@stephentoubstephentoub

Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

SafeHandle marshalling broken with Mono


2 participants

@stephentoub@lambdageek

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site
(function() {
var enabled = true;
function applyDarkMode() {
if (!enabled) return;
// Create style element if it doesn't exist
var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');
if (!style) {
style = document.createElement('style');
style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';
document.head.appendChild(style);
}
// Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video
style.textContent = '
/* Invert everything except media */
html {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
background: #1a1a2e !important;
}
/* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */
img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*="background-image"] {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
}
/* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */
.no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,
[data-theme="light"], [data-theme="light"],
.ace_editor, .ace_editor *,
.CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,
.monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,
.markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,
.highlight, .highlight *,
pre code, pre code * {
filter: none !important;
}
/* Fix common UI elements */
.modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
background: #2d2d44 !important;
border-color: #444 !important;
}
/* Scrollbars */
::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }
::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }
::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }
/* Selection */
::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }
::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }
';
}
function removeDarkMode() {
var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');
if (style) style.remove();
}
// Toggle with Alt+Shift+D
document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {
if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {
e.preventDefault();
enabled = !enabled;
if (enabled) {
applyDarkMode();
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');
} else {
removeDarkMode();
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');
}
}
});
// Apply on load
applyDarkMode();
// Re-apply on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {
applyDarkMode();
}
});
observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); }
})();
})();
Fix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for mono by stephentoub · Pull Request #82376 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
Fix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for mono - #82376
Merged
stephentoub merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
stephentoub:fixmonosafehandle
Feb 28, 2023
Merged
Fix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for mono#82376
stephentoub merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
stephentoub:fixmonosafehandle
Conversation
@stephentoub
@stephentoubstephentoub
commented
Feb 20, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Try to fix mono failure
Fixes#82308
@build-analysisbuild-analysisBot
mentioned this pull request
Feb 20, 2023

Open

5 tasks
@stephentoubstephentoub
added
the 
NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
label
Feb 20, 2023
@stephentoubstephentoub
changed the title
Move SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace to not be first fieldFix SafeHandle debug-only _ctorStackTrace for monoFeb 21, 2023
@stephentoubstephentoub
removed
the 
NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
label
Feb 21, 2023

This was referenced Feb 21, 2023

Closed


Closed

@stephentoub
stephentoub
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/azp list
@azure-pipelines
azure-pipelinesBot
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown


CI/CD Pipelines for this repository:
@stephentoub
stephentoub
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/azp run runtime-community
@azure-pipelines
azure-pipelinesBot
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown


Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).
@stephentoub
stephentoub
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/azp run runtime-extra-platforms
@azure-pipelines
azure-pipelinesBot
commented
Feb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown


Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).
lambdageek
lambdageek
reviewed
Feb 23, 2023
View reviewed changes
@lambdageeklambdageek
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is technically fine, but maybe we should do something a bit cleaner.
Also I really think we need
#if MONO[StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)]
#endif
Comment threadsrc/libraries/System.Private.CoreLib/src/System/Runtime/InteropServices/SafeHandle.cs

Comment on lines

+31
 to 
33

#if DEBUG && CORECLR
 private readonly string? _ctorStackTrace;
#endif
@lambdageeklambdageekFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@stephentoub questions:
  1. Can we move this member to the end of the set of instance members. (And I assume do the related changes on the native side in coreclr)
  2. For Mono we should really have [StructLayout(Sequential)] on any class where we care about the field layout. Otherwise we're just relying on auto layout coincidentally getting the fields in the right order.
  3. Should we make SafeHandle.Mono.cs and SafeHandle.CoreCLR.cs that just contain the instance field definitions? #if DEBUG && CORECLR accomplishes the same thing but feels more fragile.
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can we move this member to the end of the set of instance members. (And I assume do the related changes on the native side in coreclr)
I'd previously done that, and I believe the issues I hit were to do with alignment, though it's also possible I just messed something up or neglected to edit something I needed to edit.
For Mono we should really have [StructLayout(Sequential)] on any class where we care about the field layout. Otherwise we're just relying on auto layout coincidentally getting the fields in the right order.
This is irrespective of this change or this field, right? You're saying mono is expecting that handle is first and it may not be.
Should we make SafeHandle.Mono.cs and SafeHandle.CoreCLR.cs that just contain the instance field definitions? #if DEBUG && CORECLR accomplishes the same thing but feels more fragile.
I don't love the duplication there; that feels more fragile to me, actually. If this field is problematic, we can just remove it and I can put it back in the future should someone want to do another push like I did to drive down SafeHandle finalization debt.
@lambdageeklambdageekFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is irrespective of this change or this field, right? You're saying mono is expecting that handle is first and it may not be.
Yea, it's not required for this PR (all the other fields are non-reference so auto layout will get things right). Just might as well do some future-proofing
@lambdageeklambdageekFeb 23, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Overall I'm fine with the PR as is. It would be nice to get the layout attribute in here, but we could also do a separate PR for that. If splitting the file feels more fragile to you @stephentoub , I'm ok with the PR as is.
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 28, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@lambdageek, mono actually already has StructLayout applied:
runtime/src/mono/System.Private.CoreLib/src/System/Runtime/InteropServices/SafeHandle.Mono.cs

Lines 6 to 8
in
5e3dd8d
// Mono runtime relies on exact layout
[StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)]
publicabstractpartialclassSafeHandle
@stephentoub
stephentoub
merged commit 5e3dd8d
into
dotnet:mainFeb 28, 2023
@stephentoub
stephentoub
deleted the

fixmonosafehandle

branch
February 28, 2023 22:43
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Mar 31, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@lambdageeklambdageeklambdageek approved these changes

Assignees

@stephentoubstephentoub

Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

SafeHandle marshalling broken with Mono


2 participants

@stephentoub@lambdageek