From 36d22d82aa202bb199967e9512281e9a53db42c9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Daniel Baumann Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2024 21:33:14 +0200 Subject: Adding upstream version 115.7.0esr. Signed-off-by: Daniel Baumann --- js/src/jit-test/tests/debug/Frame-onStep-12.js | 118 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 118 insertions(+) create mode 100644 js/src/jit-test/tests/debug/Frame-onStep-12.js (limited to 'js/src/jit-test/tests/debug/Frame-onStep-12.js') diff --git a/js/src/jit-test/tests/debug/Frame-onStep-12.js b/js/src/jit-test/tests/debug/Frame-onStep-12.js new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..c751c278a5 --- /dev/null +++ b/js/src/jit-test/tests/debug/Frame-onStep-12.js @@ -0,0 +1,118 @@ +// Check that stepping doesn't make it look like unreachable code is running. + +// Because our script source notes record only those bytecode offsets +// at which source positions change, the default behavior in the +// absence of a source note is to attribute a bytecode instruction to +// the same source location as the preceding instruction. When control +// flows from the preceding bytecode to the one we're emitting, that's +// usually plausible. But successors in the bytecode stream are not +// necessarily successors in the control flow graph. If the preceding +// bytecode was a back edge of a loop, or the jump at the end of a +// 'then' clause, its source position can be completely unrelated to +// that of its successor. +// +// We try to avoid showing such nonsense offsets to the user by +// requiring breakpoints and single-stepping to stop only at a line's +// entry points, as reported by Debugger.Script.prototype.getLineOffsets; +// and then ensuring that those entry points are all offsets mentioned +// explicitly in the source notes, and hence deliberately attributed +// to the given bytecode. +// +// This bit of JavaScript compiles to bytecode ending in a branch +// instruction whose source position is the body of an unreachable +// loop. The first instruction of the bytecode we emit following it +// will inherit this nonsense position, if we have not explicitly +// emitted a source note for said instruction. +// +// This test steps across such code and verifies that control never +// appears to enter the unreachable loop. + +var bitOfCode = `debugger; // +0 + if(false) { // +1 + for(var b=0; b<0; b++) { // +2 + c = 2 // +3 + } // +4 + }`; // +5 + +var g = newGlobal({newCompartment: true}); +var dbg = Debugger(g); + +g.eval("function nothing() { }\n"); + +var log = ''; +dbg.onDebuggerStatement = function(frame) { + let debugLine = frame.script.getOffsetLocation(frame.offset).lineNumber; + frame.onStep = function() { + let foundLine = this.script.getOffsetLocation(this.offset).lineNumber; + if (this.script.getLineOffsets(foundLine).indexOf(this.offset) >= 0) { + log += (foundLine - debugLine).toString(16); + } + }; +}; + +function testOne(name, body, expected) { + print(name); + log = ''; + g.eval(`function ${name} () { ${body} }`); + g.eval(`${name}();`); + assertEq(log, expected); +} + + + +// Test the instructions at the end of a "try". +testOne("testTryFinally", + `try { + ${bitOfCode} + } finally { // +6 + } // +7 + nothing(); // +8 + `, "1689"); + +// The same but without a finally clause. +testOne("testTryCatch", + `try { + ${bitOfCode} + } catch (e) { // +6 + } // +7 + nothing(); // +8 + `, "189"); + +// Test the instructions at the end of a "catch". +testOne("testCatchFinally", + `try { + throw new TypeError(); + } catch (e) { + ${bitOfCode} + } finally { // +6 + } // +7 + nothing(); // +8 + `, "1689"); + +// Test the instruction at the end of a "finally" clause. +testOne("testFinally", + `try { + } finally { + ${bitOfCode} + } // +6 + nothing(); // +7 + `, "178"); + +// Test the instruction at the end of a "then" clause. +testOne("testThen", + `if (1 === 1) { + ${bitOfCode} + } else { // +6 + } // +7 + nothing(); // +8 + `, "189"); + +// Test the instructions leaving a switch block. +testOne("testSwitch", + `var x = 5; + switch (x) { + case 5: + ${bitOfCode} + } // +6 + nothing(); // +7 + `, "178"); -- cgit v1.2.3