Throw NotSupportedException when using SetErrorStatusOnException in Mono Runtime and Native AOT environment.
#5374
There are no files selected for viewing
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Instead of calling
RuntimeFeature.IsDynamicCodeSupported, can this just call the API to see whether it is supported?Note that this API is also not supported in Mono (irrespective of whether IsDynamicCodeSupported is true or false), so it would cover the Mono.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you! I agree above is the proper way to handle the situation. Shall I log this feature request in the runtime repo?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, please.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've filed a request to implement the API in runtime: dotnet/runtime#98878.
Chatted with @eerhardt, @jkotas and @reyang offline.
While the above API is being implemented, we may do the followings to avoid crashing the consumer's app:
SetErrorStatusOnException()with [RequiresDynamicCode] to serve as a compile time warning for the consumer. One caveat of this approach is IsDynamicCode does not really explain the nature of this issue and may further confuse the consumer.System.PlatformNotSupportedExceptionupon callingMarshal.GetExceptionPointer(). Store the state inExceptionProcessor()and dump the Message "Exception processor not supported" insideOnEnd(Activity activity).Not sure which one is a better stopgap of this issue?
cc @MichalStrehovsky, @agocke
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Discussed in today's SIG meeting.
I'll go with adding the compile time warning as was mentioned in 1. above.
Plus, guarding the extension method
opentelemetry-dotnet/src/OpenTelemetry/Trace/Builder/TracerProviderBuilderSdk.cs
Line 144 in e7cbbbb
with a try/catch on Marshal.GetExceptionPointers to avoid adding useless Processor at runtime (if user ever decided to suppress the compile time AOT warning.)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There is no need to add
try/catchblock. We just have to callMarshal.GetExceptionPointers()once in theExceptionProcessorctor and rethrow the exception with our custom message.@CodeBlanch Just to confirm this is what you suggested, right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm OK with either re-throwing or just silently failing & not adding the processor. Probably re-throwing is better to alert the users 🤔
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
+1 on re-throwing the exception at start-up.