[Tarantool-patches] [PATCH] test: disable cases in PUC-Rio tests for debug line hook

[Tarantool-patches] [PATCH] test: disable cases in PUC-Rio tests for debug line hook

[Sergey Bronnikov via Tarantool-patches]

From: Sergey Bronnikov <sergeyb@tarantool.org>

In order to fix issue [1] it is required to introduce a wrapper for
`__pairs()`. This wrapper breaks a couple of tests for builtin debug
module. Patch disables testcases when running under Tarantool.

1. https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/issues/2867
---
 test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua | 4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)

diff --git a/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua b/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua
index b148c2dd..b05075bb 100644
--- a/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua
+++ b/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua
@@ -169,10 +169,12 @@ test([[for i=1,3 do
 end
 ]], {1,2,1,2,1,2,1,3})
 
+if not _TARANTOOL then
 test([[for i,v in pairs{'a','b'} do
   a=i..v
 end
 ]], {1,2,1,2,1,3})
+end
 
 -- Test is adapted to the behaviour of LuaJIT, as it generates
 -- only four line events, unlike Lua, which generates five
@@ -411,7 +413,9 @@ function g1(x) g(x) end
 
 local function h (x) local f=g1; return f(x) end
 
+if not _TARANTOOL then
 h(true)
+end
 
 local b = {}
 debug.sethook(function (e) table.insert(b, e) end, "cr")
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH] test: disable cases in PUC-Rio tests for debug line hook

[Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches]

Hi, Sergey!

Thanks for the patch!
Please consider my comments below.

On 06.02.23, Sergey Bronnikov wrote:
> From: Sergey Bronnikov <sergeyb@tarantool.org>
> 
> In order to fix issue [1] it is required to introduce a wrapper for
> `__pairs()`. This wrapper breaks a couple of tests for builtin debug

IINM, it's not for the metamethod `__pairs`, but for the built-in
function `pairs()`.

> module.
          ^ Those tests rely on specific backtrace, which is changed by
  an additional wrapper for `pairs()`.

>         Patch disables testcases when running under Tarantool.
> 
> 1. https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/issues/2867
> ---
>  test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua | 4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua b/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua
> index b148c2dd..b05075bb 100644
> --- a/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua
> +++ b/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua
> @@ -169,10 +169,12 @@ test([[for i=1,3 do
>  end
>  ]], {1,2,1,2,1,2,1,3})
>  
> +if not _TARANTOOL then

Minor: It will be nice to add the comment about the wrapper for
`pairs()` in Tarantool here.

>  test([[for i,v in pairs{'a','b'} do
>    a=i..v
>  end
>  ]], {1,2,1,2,1,3})
> +end
>  
>  -- Test is adapted to the behaviour of LuaJIT, as it generates
>  -- only four line events, unlike Lua, which generates five
> @@ -411,7 +413,9 @@ function g1(x) g(x) end
>  
>  local function h (x) local f=g1; return f(x) end
>  
> +if not _TARANTOOL then
>  h(true)
> +end

These changes don't fix the problem for the test in LuaJIT [1]:

| src/luajit: test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua:403: assertion failed!
| stack traceback:
|         [C]: in function 'assert'
|         test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua:403: in function 'g'
|         test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua:412: in function 'h'
|         test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua:417: in function '_dofile'
|         test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/all.lua:89: in main chunk
|         [C]: at 0x56039b641064
As far as the linedefined number for `g1()` function is changed.

I suggest the following patch (without comments to add) (haven't checked
it on Tarantool):
===================================================================
diff --git a/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua b/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua
index b05075bb..550debdc 100644
--- a/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua
+++ b/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua
@@ -400,7 +400,7 @@ local function f (x)
   if x then
     assert(debug.getinfo(1, "S").what == "Lua")
     local tail = debug.getinfo(2)
-    assert(tail.what == "Lua" and tail.linedefined == 410 and tail.func == g1)
+    assert(tail.what == "Lua" and tail.linedefined == 412 and tail.func == g1)
     assert(getfenv(3))
     assert(debug.getinfo(3, "S").what == "main")
     print"+"
@@ -413,9 +413,7 @@ function g1(x) g(x) end
 
 local function h (x) local f=g1; return f(x) end
 
-if not _TARANTOOL then
 h(true)
-end
 
 local b = {}
 debug.sethook(function (e) table.insert(b, e) end, "cr")
===================================================================

>  
>  local b = {}
>  debug.sethook(function (e) table.insert(b, e) end, "cr")
> -- 
> 2.34.1
> 

[1]: https://github.com/tarantool/luajit/actions/runs/4101439522/jobs/7073225472

-- 
Best regards,
Sergey Kaplun

Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH] test: disable cases in PUC-Rio tests for debug line hook

[Sergey Bronnikov via Tarantool-patches]

Hi, Sergey!

Thanks for a quick review!

See my answers inline.

On 2/6/23 11:31, Sergey Kaplun wrote:
> Hi, Sergey!
>
> Thanks for the patch!
> Please consider my comments below.
>
> On 06.02.23, Sergey Bronnikov wrote:
>> From: Sergey Bronnikov <sergeyb@tarantool.org>
>>
>> In order to fix issue [1] it is required to introduce a wrapper for
>> `__pairs()`. This wrapper breaks a couple of tests for builtin debug
> IINM, it's not for the metamethod `__pairs`, but for the built-in
> function `pairs()`.
Right! Updated  commit message.
>
>> module.
>            ^ Those tests rely on specific backtrace, which is changed by
>    an additional wrapper for `pairs()`.

Added to commit message.


>
>>          Patch disables testcases when running under Tarantool.
>>
>> 1. https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/issues/2867
>> ---
>>   test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua | 4 ++++
>>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua b/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua
>> index b148c2dd..b05075bb 100644
>> --- a/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua
>> +++ b/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua
>> @@ -169,10 +169,12 @@ test([[for i=1,3 do
>>   end
>>   ]], {1,2,1,2,1,2,1,3})
>>   
>> +if not _TARANTOOL then
> Minor: It will be nice to add the comment about the wrapper for
> `pairs()` in Tarantool here.


Added:

"Tarantool has a wrapper around builtin function `pairs()`, see see gh-2867.
Testcase below relies on a specific backtrace, which is changed by an
introduced wrapper for `pairs()`."

>
>>   test([[for i,v in pairs{'a','b'} do
>>     a=i..v
>>   end
>>   ]], {1,2,1,2,1,3})
>> +end
>>   
>>   -- Test is adapted to the behaviour of LuaJIT, as it generates
>>   -- only four line events, unlike Lua, which generates five
>> @@ -411,7 +413,9 @@ function g1(x) g(x) end
>>   
>>   local function h (x) local f=g1; return f(x) end
>>   
>> +if not _TARANTOOL then
>>   h(true)
>> +end
> These changes don't fix the problem for the test in LuaJIT [1]:
>
> | src/luajit: test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua:403: assertion failed!
> | stack traceback:
> |         [C]: in function 'assert'
> |         test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua:403: in function 'g'
> |         test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua:412: in function 'h'
> |         test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua:417: in function '_dofile'
> |         test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/all.lua:89: in main chunk
> |         [C]: at 0x56039b641064
> As far as the linedefined number for `g1()` function is changed.
>
> I suggest the following patch (without comments to add) (haven't checked
> it on Tarantool):
> ===================================================================
> diff --git a/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua b/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua
> index b05075bb..550debdc 100644
> --- a/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua
> +++ b/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua
> @@ -400,7 +400,7 @@ local function f (x)
>     if x then
>       assert(debug.getinfo(1, "S").what == "Lua")
>       local tail = debug.getinfo(2)
> -    assert(tail.what == "Lua" and tail.linedefined == 410 and tail.func == g1)
> +    assert(tail.what == "Lua" and tail.linedefined == 412 and tail.func == g1)
>       assert(getfenv(3))
>       assert(debug.getinfo(3, "S").what == "main")
>       print"+"
> @@ -413,9 +413,7 @@ function g1(x) g(x) end
>   
>   local function h (x) local f=g1; return f(x) end
>   
> -if not _TARANTOOL then
>   h(true)
> -end
>   
>   local b = {}
>   debug.sethook(function (e) table.insert(b, e) end, "cr")
> ===================================================================

Reverted a change around call of h() function, updated line number and 
added a message to assert with useful information:


    if x then
      assert(debug.getinfo(1, "S").what == "Lua")
      local tail = debug.getinfo(2)
-    assert(tail.what == "Lua" and tail.linedefined == 410 and tail.func 
== g1)
+    assert(tail.what == "Lua" and tail.linedefined == 418 and tail.func 
== g1,
+           ("linedefined %s, what %s"):format(tail.linedefined, tail.what))
      assert(getfenv(3))
      assert(debug.getinfo(3, "S").what == "main")
      print"+"


>>   
>>   local b = {}
>>   debug.sethook(function (e) table.insert(b, e) end, "cr")
>> -- 
>> 2.34.1
>>
> [1]: https://github.com/tarantool/luajit/actions/runs/4101439522/jobs/7073225472
>

Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH] test: disable cases in PUC-Rio tests for debug line hook

[Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches]

Hi, Sergey!

Thanks for the fixes!
LGTM, after fixing a few more nits.

On 06.02.23, Sergey Bronnikov wrote:
> Hi, Sergey!
> 
> Thanks for a quick review!
> 
> See my answers inline.
> 
> On 2/6/23 11:31, Sergey Kaplun wrote:
> > Hi, Sergey!
> >
> > Thanks for the patch!
> > Please consider my comments below.
> >
> > On 06.02.23, Sergey Bronnikov wrote:
> >> From: Sergey Bronnikov <sergeyb@tarantool.org>
> >>
> >> In order to fix issue [1] it is required to introduce a wrapper for
> >> `__pairs()`. This wrapper breaks a couple of tests for builtin debug
> > IINM, it's not for the metamethod `__pairs`, but for the built-in
> > function `pairs()`.
> Right! Updated  commit message.
> >
> >> module.
> >            ^ Those tests rely on specific backtrace, which is changed by
> >    an additional wrapper for `pairs()`.
> 
> Added to commit message.

Nit: "tests" should be in plural form in those sentences as far as the
only one test (the one with `pairs()` usage) is broken after introducing
`pairs()` wrapper.

> 
> 
> >
> >>          Patch disables testcases when running under Tarantool.
> >>
> >> 1. https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/issues/2867
> >> ---
> >>   test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua | 4 ++++
> >>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua b/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua
> >> index b148c2dd..b05075bb 100644
> >> --- a/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua
> >> +++ b/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua
> >> @@ -169,10 +169,12 @@ test([[for i=1,3 do
> >>   end
> >>   ]], {1,2,1,2,1,2,1,3})
> >>   
> >> +if not _TARANTOOL then
> > Minor: It will be nice to add the comment about the wrapper for
> > `pairs()` in Tarantool here.
> 
> 
> Added:
> 
> "Tarantool has a wrapper around builtin function `pairs()`, see see gh-2867.
> Testcase below relies on a specific backtrace, which is changed by an
> introduced wrapper for `pairs()`."

Nit: Please, use `--` comment stile, like elsewhere in this file.
Multiline comments are used for debug tests and for quoting some chunks
output.

Friendly reminder: Don't forget to change linedefined below:).

> 
> >
> >>   test([[for i,v in pairs{'a','b'} do
> >>     a=i..v
> >>   end
> >>   ]], {1,2,1,2,1,3})
> >> +end
> >>   
> >>   -- Test is adapted to the behaviour of LuaJIT, as it generates
> >>   -- only four line events, unlike Lua, which generates five
> >> @@ -411,7 +413,9 @@ function g1(x) g(x) end
> >>   
> >>   local function h (x) local f=g1; return f(x) end
> >>   
> >> +if not _TARANTOOL then
> >>   h(true)
> >> +end
> > These changes don't fix the problem for the test in LuaJIT [1]:
> >
> > | src/luajit: test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua:403: assertion failed!
> > | stack traceback:
> > |         [C]: in function 'assert'
> > |         test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua:403: in function 'g'
> > |         test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua:412: in function 'h'
> > |         test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua:417: in function '_dofile'
> > |         test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/all.lua:89: in main chunk
> > |         [C]: at 0x56039b641064
> > As far as the linedefined number for `g1()` function is changed.
> >
> > I suggest the following patch (without comments to add) (haven't checked
> > it on Tarantool):
> > ===================================================================
> > diff --git a/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua b/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua
> > index b05075bb..550debdc 100644
> > --- a/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua
> > +++ b/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua
> > @@ -400,7 +400,7 @@ local function f (x)
> >     if x then
> >       assert(debug.getinfo(1, "S").what == "Lua")
> >       local tail = debug.getinfo(2)
> > -    assert(tail.what == "Lua" and tail.linedefined == 410 and tail.func == g1)
> > +    assert(tail.what == "Lua" and tail.linedefined == 412 and tail.func == g1)
> >       assert(getfenv(3))
> >       assert(debug.getinfo(3, "S").what == "main")
> >       print"+"
> > @@ -413,9 +413,7 @@ function g1(x) g(x) end
> >   
> >   local function h (x) local f=g1; return f(x) end
> >   
> > -if not _TARANTOOL then
> >   h(true)
> > -end
> >   
> >   local b = {}
> >   debug.sethook(function (e) table.insert(b, e) end, "cr")
> > ===================================================================
> 
> Reverted a change around call of h() function, updated line number and 
> added a message to assert with useful information:
> 
> 
>     if x then
>       assert(debug.getinfo(1, "S").what == "Lua")
>       local tail = debug.getinfo(2)
> -    assert(tail.what == "Lua" and tail.linedefined == 410 and tail.func 
> == g1)
> +    assert(tail.what == "Lua" and tail.linedefined == 418 and tail.func 
> == g1,
> +           ("linedefined %s, what %s"):format(tail.linedefined, tail.what))
>       assert(getfenv(3))
>       assert(debug.getinfo(3, "S").what == "main")
>       print"+"
> 
> 
> >>   
> >>   local b = {}
> >>   debug.sethook(function (e) table.insert(b, e) end, "cr")
> >> -- 
> >> 2.34.1
> >>
> > [1]: https://github.com/tarantool/luajit/actions/runs/4101439522/jobs/7073225472
> >

-- 
Best regards,
Sergey Kaplun

Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH] test: disable cases in PUC-Rio tests for debug line hook

[Sergey Bronnikov via Tarantool-patches]

Hi, Sergey!


thanks for review! Patch has been updated and force-pushed.


On 2/6/23 16:24, Sergey Kaplun wrote:

<snipped>

>>>> module.
>>>             ^ Those tests rely on specific backtrace, which is changed by
>>>     an additional wrapper for `pairs()`.
>> Added to commit message.
> Nit: "tests" should be in plural form in those sentences as far as the
> only one test (the one with `pairs()` usage) is broken after introducing
> `pairs()` wrapper.

Updated in short and long commit message descriptions.


>
>>
>>>>           Patch disables testcases when running under Tarantool.
>>>>
>>>> 1. https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/issues/2867
>>>> ---
>>>>    test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua | 4 ++++
>>>>    1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua b/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua
>>>> index b148c2dd..b05075bb 100644
>>>> --- a/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua
>>>> +++ b/test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests/db.lua
>>>> @@ -169,10 +169,12 @@ test([[for i=1,3 do
>>>>    end
>>>>    ]], {1,2,1,2,1,2,1,3})
>>>>    
>>>> +if not _TARANTOOL then
>>> Minor: It will be nice to add the comment about the wrapper for
>>> `pairs()` in Tarantool here.
>>
>> Added:
>>
>> "Tarantool has a wrapper around builtin function `pairs()`, see see gh-2867.
>> Testcase below relies on a specific backtrace, which is changed by an
>> introduced wrapper for `pairs()`."
> Nit: Please, use `--` comment stile, like elsewhere in this file.
> Multiline comments are used for debug tests and for quoting some chunks
> output.
>
> Friendly reminder: Don't forget to change linedefined below:).


Sure, updated:


@@ -169,11 +169,9 @@ test([[for i=1,3 do
  end
  ]], {1,2,1,2,1,2,1,3})

---[[
-Tarantool has a wrapper around builtin function `pairs()`, see see gh-2867.
-Testcase below relies on a specific backtrace, which is changed by an
-introduced wrapper for `pairs()`.
-]]
+-- Tarantool has a wrapper around builtin function `pairs()`, see see 
gh-2867.
+-- Testcase below relies on a specific backtrace, which is changed by an
+-- introduced wrapper for `pairs()`.
  if not _TARANTOOL then
  test([[for i,v in pairs{'a','b'} do
    a=i..v


<snipped>

Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH] test: disable cases in PUC-Rio tests for debug line hook

[Alexander Turenko via Tarantool-patches]

> +if not _TARANTOOL then
>  test([[for i,v in pairs{'a','b'} do
>    a=i..v
>  end
>  ]], {1,2,1,2,1,3})
> +end

If you're interested, I met a similar problem recently and overrun it in
another way:

https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/commit/b6ba22d869f54f0f6619b5bd71489ee0e9b5d0d1

WBR, Alexander Turenko.

Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH] test: disable cases in PUC-Rio tests for debug line hook

[Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches]

Hi, Alexander!

Thanks for the participating!

On 08.02.23, Alexander Turenko wrote:
> > +if not _TARANTOOL then
> >  test([[for i,v in pairs{'a','b'} do
> >    a=i..v
> >  end
> >  ]], {1,2,1,2,1,3})
> > +end
> 
> If you're interested, I met a similar problem recently and overrun it in
> another way:
> 
> https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/commit/b6ba22d869f54f0f6619b5bd71489ee0e9b5d0d1

Yes, your solution I like much more.
(Honestly, I totally forgot about test-init file.)

> 
> WBR, Alexander Turenko.

-- 
Best regards,
Sergey Kaplun

Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH] test: disable cases in PUC-Rio tests for debug line hook

[Igor Munkin via Tarantool-patches]

Sergey,

Thanks for the patch!

As we discussed, let's implement the approach suggested by Sasha
(honestly, I totally forgot about it despite I reviewed that patch).

Hence, this patch can be ignored.

-- 
Best regards,
IM