Fix potential double-update of a buffer in Verilog Projecdt #2091
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Instead of in the language server, define the callback that updates the symbol table in the symbol table itself (CreateBufferTrackerListener()). Use that in various places, including the unit tests that it simplifies.
Explained in the unit test. TL;DR: if we only update with last_good() content, we might update with the same good parse multiple times, which the string range index will detect and CHECK()-complain.
fangism
approved these changes
Feb 1, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
The VerilogProject is sensitive to adding the exact same file content twice, as it buildls a string index mapping back to the file.
The symbol table was ignnoring updates with files that might not be parseable, where the
last_good()was essentially not changing, i.e. it was pushing the samelast_good()content (with the exact same string view content) to the project which made it not happy. This problematic handling was probably highlighted by the recent fix of #2078 which made sure all registering and unregistering of files is accounted for.The actual fix is small, so split into two commits
current()parse instead oflast_good()to verilog project.