Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Fix confusion of enum _framestate with enum _frameowner #106156

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
+4 −3
Closed

Fix confusion of enum _framestate with enum _frameowner #106156

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions Include/internal/pycore_frame.h
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -52,6 +52,7 @@ enum _frameowner {
FRAME_OWNED_BY_GENERATOR = 1,
FRAME_OWNED_BY_FRAME_OBJECT = 2,
FRAME_OWNED_BY_CSTACK = 3,
FRAME_OWNED_BY_ACCIDENT = 4,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Maybe you should add a NEWS describing that you added a new value to the enum_frameowner enumeration in pycore_frame.h.

I think that making modifications to the interpreter core requires adding.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is not part of the public API; it’s an internal fix that has no direct relevance to Python users or extension authors.

However, the surrounding code has changed, so I’m closing this in favor of

};

typedef struct _PyInterpreterFrame {
Expand Down
6 changes: 3 additions & 3 deletions Python/frame.c
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -50,13 +50,13 @@ _PyFrame_MakeAndSetFrameObject(_PyInterpreterFrame *frame)
// Just pretend that we have an owned, cleared frame so frame_dealloc
// doesn't make the situation worse:
f->f_frame = (_PyInterpreterFrame *)f->_f_frame_data;
f->f_frame->owner = FRAME_CLEARED;
f->f_frame->owner = FRAME_OWNED_BY_ACCIDENT;
f->f_frame->frame_obj = f;
Py_DECREF(f);
return frame->frame_obj;
}
assert(frame->owner != FRAME_OWNED_BY_FRAME_OBJECT);
assert(frame->owner != FRAME_CLEARED);
assert(frame->owner != FRAME_OWNED_BY_ACCIDENT);
f->f_frame = frame;
frame->frame_obj = f;
return f;
Expand All @@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ take_ownership(PyFrameObject *f, _PyInterpreterFrame *frame)
{
assert(frame->owner != FRAME_OWNED_BY_CSTACK);
assert(frame->owner != FRAME_OWNED_BY_FRAME_OBJECT);
assert(frame->owner != FRAME_CLEARED);
assert(frame->owner != FRAME_OWNED_BY_ACCIDENT);
Py_ssize_t size = ((char*)&frame->localsplus[frame->stacktop]) - (char *)frame;
Py_INCREF(_PyFrame_GetCode(frame));
memcpy((_PyInterpreterFrame *)f->_f_frame_data, frame, size);
Expand Down
Loading