-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.1k
Delete stackwalk cache #99137
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
Delete stackwalk cache #99137
Conversation
10526fe
to
bf8d29e
Compare
CI should catch this, but just in case: my recently merged #98908 added a new call to the
To fix, replace with: GetThread()->StackWalkFrames(FindFailFastCallerCallback, &findCallerData, FUNCTIONSONLY | QUICKUNWIND); |
@@ -2716,7 +2716,7 @@ class Thread | |||
// stack crawl. Eventually need to always do this but it | |||
// breaks the debugger right now. | |||
|
|||
#define LIGHTUNWIND 0x0020 // allow using cache schema (see StackwalkCache class) |
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.
There is confusion about what's called LIGHTUNWIND vs. QUICKUNWIND. The implementation of the LIGHTUNWIND was under HAS_QUICKUNWIND ifdef and otherwise used Quick Unwind names.
The distinction between LIGHTUNWIND vs. QUICKUNWIND seems to be important for Windows x86 unwinding in abnormal situations, so I am going to keep it, but I am going to rename everything related to light unwind to be called light unwind.
7f3f965
to
12113ec
Compare
… bit on x86, but it is not worth it to keep it around for that.
It costs about as much as it saves on x64. It may be helping a little bit on x86, but it is not worth it to keep it around for that.