Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

bpo-33165: Remove redundant stack unwind for findCaller() #17714

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

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

evandrocoan
Copy link

@evandrocoan evandrocoan commented Dec 27, 2019

by directly getting the right frame on Lib/logging/init.py:currentframe()

This is a slight improvement for #7424 (bpo-33165: Added stacklevel parameter to logging APIs)

Instead of getting the fullstack trace and only then unwind the desired frames, just pass the required frame index and get it directly, i.e., without "unstacking" n frames.

I also added the frame level as a Logger attribute because when extending the default Logger and implementing/specializing the _log function, all stacktraces need to be increased by 1. For example, the debug_tools pypi module inherits from Logger and defines its own _log() function:
https://github.com/evandrocoan/debugtools/blob/d279bf3278f501294a72159f3aa189b7237528b2/all/debug_tools/logger.py#L166
https://github.com/evandrocoan/debugtools/blob/d279bf3278f501294a72159f3aa189b7237528b2/all/debug_tools/logger.py#L970
https://github.com/evandrocoan/debugtools/blob/d279bf3278f501294a72159f3aa189b7237528b2/all/debug_tools/logger.py#L1317

https://bugs.python.org/issue33165

@evandrocoan evandrocoan requested a review from vsajip as a code owner December 27, 2019 14:15
evandrocoan added a commit to evandrocoan/debugtools that referenced this pull request Dec 27, 2019
bpo-33165: Remove redundant stack unwind for findCaller()
python/cpython#17714
evandrocoan added a commit to evandrocoan/debugtools that referenced this pull request Dec 27, 2019
bpo-33165: Remove redundant stack unwind for findCaller()
python/cpython#17714
@@ -1506,17 +1507,11 @@ def findCaller(self, stack_info=False, stacklevel=1):
Find the stack frame of the caller so that we can note the source
file name, line number and function name.
"""
f = currentframe()
f = currentframe(self.default_stack_level + stacklevel)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Shouldn't the unwinding really be done later? A few lines down, we read:

        while hasattr(f, "f_code"):
            co = f.f_code
            filename = os.path.normcase(co.co_filename)
            if filename == _srcfile:
                f = f.f_back
                continue

This 'escapes' the stack frames generated inside the current file. I would expect any additional stacklevel treatment to happen afterwards.

As a result of the current implementation (with or without the proposed changes in the current PR), the stacklevel parameter to .warn must be one higher than the parameter to .warning in order to get to the same frame.

"""Return the frame object for the caller's stack frame."""
try:
raise Exception
except Exception:
return sys.exc_info()[2].tb_frame.f_back
return sys.exc_info()[level-1].tb_frame.f_back
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I believe this is incorrect. exc_info returns three items and probably all we can do is

Suggested change
return sys.exc_info()[level-1].tb_frame.f_back
frame = sys.exc_info()[2].tb_frame.f_back
while frame and stacklevel > 0:
frame = frame.f_back
stacklevel -= 1
if not frame:
raise ValueError("call stack is not deep enough")
return frame

@joukewitteveen
Copy link
Contributor

This PR conflicts with #28287. I believe it is best to close/reject the current PR in favor of #28287.

@evandrocoan
Copy link
Author

This was already fixed/implemented by dde9fdb

@evandrocoan evandrocoan deleted the f_currentframe branch September 11, 2021 14:56
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants