GeezerVison

The World Wide Web, restored to 800 pixels of glory.

GeezerVison is showing github.com — [3.5] bpo-29537: Tolerate legacy invalid bytecode by ncoghlan · Pull Request #169 · python/cpython

Conversation

ncoghlan commented Feb 19, 2017 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Copy link

Copy Markdown

Contributor

bpo-27286 fixed a problem where BUILD_MAP_UNPACK_WITH_CALL could
be emitted with an incorrect oparg value, causing the eval loop
to access the wrong stack entry when attempting to read the
function name.

The associated magic number change caused significant problems when
attempting to upgrade to 3.5.3 for anyone that relies on pre-cached
bytecode remaining valid across maintenance releases.

This patch restores the ability to import legacy bytecode generated
by 3.5.0, 3.5.1 or 3.5.2, and modifies the eval loop to
avoid any harmful consequences from the potentially malformed legacy
bytecode.

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

All reactions


          WIP: [3.5] bpo-29537: Tolerate legacy invalid bytecode

c5b9817

bpo-27286 fixed a problem where BUILD_MAP_UNPACK_WITH_CALL could
be emitted with an incorrect oparg value, causing the eval loop
to access the wrong stack entry when attempting to read the
function name.

The associated magic number change caused significant problems when
attempting to upgrade to 3.5.3 for anyone that relies on pre-cached
bytecode remaining valid across maintenance releases.

This patch restores the ability to import legacy bytecode generated
by 3.5.0, 3.5.1 or 3.5.2 (TODO!), and modifies the eval loop to
avoid any harmful consequences from the potentially malformed legacy
bytecode.

the-knights-who-say-ni added the CLA signed label

Feb 19, 2017

serhiy-storchaka added the type-bug An unexpected behavior, bug, or error label

Feb 19, 2017

serhiy-storchaka approved these changes

Feb 19, 2017

View reviewed changes

encukou commented Feb 20, 2017

Copy link

Copy Markdown

Member

On the bug you say it only makes sense to push this with my patch to accept old bytecode.

That patch is at encukou@magic-number-workaround . It's meant to be one-off, and includes redundant sanity checks that it's patching the right magic number.
What should I do to help? Submit it as PR for review, or rework it somehow?

If you want to include it in your PR, consider the patch a contribution under Python's CLA, which I signed.

ncoghlan reacted with thumbs up emoji

All reactions

👍 1 reaction

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

ncoghlan commented Feb 23, 2017

Copy link

Copy Markdown

Contributor Author

@encukou Thanks, I'll bring it in under those terms and make a combined PR with both changes.

All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

ncoghlan added 2 commits

February 24, 2017 18:12


          Adjust test case for eval loop change

b978d98


          Include bytecode compatibility handling

codecov Bot commented Feb 24, 2017 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Copy link

Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

❗ No coverage uploaded for pull request base (3.5@24bfe15). Click here to learn what that means.
The diff coverage is 77.77%.

@@          Coverage Diff           @@
##             3.5     #169   +/-   ##
======================================
  Coverage       ?   82.41%           
======================================
  Files          ?     1404           
  Lines          ?   341485           
  Branches       ?        0           
======================================
  Hits           ?   281442           
  Misses         ?    60043           
  Partials       ?        0

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
Lib/test/test_unpack_ex.py	`88.88% <ø> (ø)`
Lib/test/test_extcall.py	`85.71% <ø> (ø)`
Lib/pkgutil.py	`47.33% <100%> (ø)`
Lib/pydoc.py	`62.08% <100%> (ø)`
Lib/importlib/util.py	`95.17% <100%> (ø)`
Lib/importlib/_bootstrap_external.py	`82.42% <60%> (ø)`

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 24bfe15...a5444ae. Read the comment docs.

All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.


          Amend comment based on implementation changes

a5444ae

serhiy-storchaka approved these changes

Feb 24, 2017

View reviewed changes

ncoghlan changed the title ~~WIP: [3.5] bpo-29537: Tolerate legacy invalid bytecode~~ [3.5] bpo-29537: Tolerate legacy invalid bytecode

Mar 8, 2017

ncoghlan added 3 commits

March 8, 2017 15:02


          Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/3.5' into bpo29537-handle-legacy…

0ba334d

…-BUILD_MAP_UNPACK_WITH_CALL-bytecode


          Add NEWS entry

22d1a65


          Add legacy bytecode compatibility tests

ca24864

ncoghlan merged commit 93602e3 into python:3.5

Mar 8, 2017

ncoghlan deleted the bpo29537-handle-legacy-BUILD_MAP_UNPACK_WITH_CALL-bytecode branch

March 30, 2018 07:44

akruis pushed a commit to akruis/cpython that referenced this pull request

Feb 18, 2019


          Stackless issue python#168: make Stackless compatible with old Cython…

638e61c

… modules (python#169)

Many extension modules were created by Cython versions before commit
037bcf0 and were compiled with regular C-Python. These modules call
PyEval_EvalFrameEx() with a broken frame object.
This commit add code to recover a broken frame in PyEval_EvalFrameEx().

jaraco pushed a commit that referenced this pull request

Dec 2, 2022


          Update pytest from 3.8.0 to 3.9.3 (#169)

2b56d7e

Reviewers

serhiy-storchaka

serhiy-storchaka approved these changes

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

type-bug

An unexpected behavior, bug, or error

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

4 participants

Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.

You are visitor 01402520 — GeezerVison does not store the pages you look up.
Best viewed with Netscape Navigator 4.7 or Internet Explorer 6 at 800×600. No cookies required.

GeezerVison

Conversation

ncoghlan commented Feb 19, 2017 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

encukou commented Feb 20, 2017

Uh oh!

ncoghlan commented Feb 23, 2017

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Feb 24, 2017 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Uh oh!

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

ncoghlan commented Feb 19, 2017 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

codecov Bot commented Feb 24, 2017 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.