Fix KeyError on resource save after calling Resource.remove_tag on parent and child tag class
#513
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
…ne of its base classes would cause a `KeyError` on resource save.
rbs-jacob
approved these changes
Nov 14, 2024
1 task
alchzh
added a commit
to alchzh/ofrak
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 18, 2024
alchzh
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 3, 2025
* Improved allocation of .bss(-like) sections The existing strategy for allocating `.bss` in RAM has a few problems - only one contiguous `.bss` region per FEM is supported. - alignment was not properly calculated for `.bss`, leading to linker errors This commit generalizes our process for allocating `.text`, `.data`, `.rodata`, etc. to `.bss` and like as well. It also improves our support for different platforms by reducing the use of hardcoded section names for determining behavior in favor of attributes defined by the binary format like `sh_type` and `sh_flags` With the new system, instead of passing `unsafe_bss_segment` to `make_fem`, `.bss` sections are allocated during the `allocate_bom` step. This is supported by free space regions that don't map to any data on the parent resource. Changes (incomplete): - Use SHT_NOBITS type to detect .bss(-like) sections on ELF toolchains - Create `FreeSpaceWithoutData`` tag for allocating regions for .bss. These are created from `MemoryRegion` children of resources with `data_range=None` - Use SHF_ALLOC flag to determine whether section needs to be patched or not instead of hard coded list of names. - Pass flag to compiler to prevent `.eh_frame` generation - Backwards compatible with old bss allocation for now, emits deprecation warnings. * Rename FreeSpaceWithoutData to RuntimeFreeSpace and FreeSpaceAnyData to AnyFreeSpace * Rename NOBITS_LEGACY_VADDR to BSS_LEGACY_VADDR * Allocate non-bss segments before bss segments in case legacy bss allocation used. * Prevent allocate_bom from allocating sections that will be discarded * Test legacy .bss allocation in ofrak_patch_maker_test * Remove workaround for remove_tag bug (fixed in #513) * Fix test_symbol_resolution for new return value of _resolve_symbols_within_BOM * Update notebook to reflect new Segment and AssembledObject definition * Add tests for dataless bss allocation to test_allocatable_allocate.py * Add test cases for RuntimeFreeSpace in the Analyzer * Add test for RuntimeFreeSpace in test_allocation_modifier * Test FreeSpaceModifier for RuntimeFreeSpace creation * Test .bss allocation both the new and old way in patch_maker * Changelog entries
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.
One sentence summary of this PR (This should go in the CHANGELOG!)
Fix bug where calling
Resource.remove_tagon both a tag class and a class that inherits from that class causes aKeyErroron resource save.Link to Related Issue(s)
#507
Does not fully fix that issue, since calling
remove_tagon only the parent tag will not properly remove it.Please describe the changes in your request.
Changes a call to
.removeto.discardinstead, since its possible the resource was already removed from the index in the same update cycleAnyone you think should look at this, specifically?