This might not be possible but it would be hugely helpful with debugging. Sometimes random bugs occur when the program is running. I'd like to be able to type something in (a string) and then it would grab a variable with the name of that string and return its value.
int mainNumber = 89;
Input: retrieve mainNumber
Output: 89
Is something like that possible? I don't want to have to create debugs for every single variable I have on the off chance something could go wrong. I know I could wait for the bug to occur, stop the program, throw a debug in and wait again, but this would be faster.
You need to learn about the variable, watch and immediate windows of Visual Studio.
Would the 'immediate window' be what you're looking for? http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/f177hahy(v=VS.100).aspx
I would suggest reading up on Trace and Debug in .NET. You can typically switch Trace and Debug statements off and on from a program's config file, thus not affecting your runtime performance unless you want these dumps. Then you can sprinkle Trace.Write(...) and Debug.Write(...) statements in your code to provide the output you desire.
Based on your comment, it sounds like you're going to need to do some research. Here are some things to consider/try:
What is the bug? Is an exception being thrown, is data not coming back correctly, etc. Identify what it is that you're trying to root cause.
Do you know under what circumstances the bug happens? Since you said random, chances are you don't yet know the answer to that.
Are you able to reproduce or see the bug in a test environment?
One option that I've done in the past is to add logging (usually to a text file) to the application in question. I put in logging in the areas of interest, and timestamp the entries. Grab enough information so you can adequately identify the actions that are occurring (before/after states of variables/objects, any supporting information that identifies the action, etc).
When a bug is reported (or reproduced), if the reporter gives enough information (i.e., time, what they were doing, other things particular to the app or what they were doing) you can look in your log files and see what was going on.
Once you have that information, you can either identify the root cause, or narrow it down to a more specific area and focus your efforts there.
It can be something of an iterative process, depending on how big the app is and how large the area of possible problems can be.
Related
I am developing a Windows Store application. Currently, I am getting intermittent hangs as described in this blog post. The issue appears to be that not enough space is given to remainder-defined column widths and TextBlocks attempting to format themselves (possibly due to the ellipsis processing). My app tends to hang indefinitely when this happens.
The question I have less related to how to solve the issue (as it seems to be described fairly well in the blog post), but instead how to find the issues. I have one fairly regularly (approximately one in five or ten start-ups) on a Hub Page, so I've been looking through there (as it's the most notable instance of issue), but it's a true Heisenbug in that it never seems to happen when debugging (or when you look for it).
So, how do I find the offending code? Is there just a pattern I need to look for (ColumnWidth="*"?). Is there a simpler way to solve this, such as changing the base style to remove one of the possibly offending properties listed in the blog post?
It seems possible that this is being caused by another issue, but this seems to be the most likely/plausible as of right now (as with the hubs I have a similar situation to what is being described there).
Also, is there a way to track when this happens in the wild? MSFT provides crash dumps on hangs, but they seem to give little to no information in them at all (and on top of that they only appear 5 days after they happen, which is less than ideal).
Thanks!
This is a complicated question to answer.
First, I think you have identified a real problem with WinRT. You theorize that the layout subsystem seems busy calculating your layout, and based on some condition that occurs around 20% of the time it does not finish in any reasonable time. Reasonable guess.
The problem, then, is when such an event does not occur during debug. In my personal development experience, errors that do not occur in debug are 99.99% timing related. Something is not finishing before a second process begins. Debugging lets those first, long process finish.
This is a real computer science question, and not so much a WinRT or Windows 8 question. To that end, the best answer I can give you without any code samples (why no code samples?) is the typical approach I employ when I reach the same dilemma. I hope it helps, at least a little.
Start with your brain.
I have always joked with developers just how much debugging can be done outside the debugger - and in your mind. Mentally walking the pipeline of your app and looking for race-condition dependencies that might cause deadlocks. Believe it or not, this solves a lot of problems a debugger could never catch - because debuggers unwind timing dependencies.
Next is simplicity.
The more complex the problem the less likely you will find the culprit. In the case of a XAML application, I tend to remove or disable value converters first. Then, I look to remove data templates. If you have element bindings, those go next. If simplifying the XAML does help - that's just the beginning to figuring it out. If it doesn't, things just got easier.
Your code behind can be disabled with just a few keystrokes and found guilty or innocent. It's the most likely place for your problem, I find, and the reason we work so hard to keep it simple, clean, and minimal. After that, there's the view model. Though it's not impossible for your view model to be the one, and indeed you still have to check, it's probably not the root of your evil.
Lastly, there's the app pipeline that loads your page, loads your data, or does anything else. Step by step your only real option is to slowly remove things from your app until you don't see the problem. Removing the problem, though is not solving it. That's a case by case thing based on your app and the logic in it. Reality is, you might see the problem leave when removing XAML, while the real problem is in the view model or elsewhere.
What am I really saying? The silver bullet you are asking for really isn't there. There are several Microsoft tools and even more third party tools to look for bottlenecks, latency problems, slow code, and stuff - but in all reality, the scenario you describe is plain ole programming. I am not saying you aren't the victim of a bug. I'm saying, with the information we have, this is all I can do for you.
You'll get it.
Third thing to do is to add logging, and instrumentation to your app.
Best of luck.
Given that Jerry has answered this at a higher level I figured I would add in the lower level answers that from the way your question is phrased makes me think you are interested in. I guess first I would like to address the last item which is the dump files. There is a mechanism for getting dump files of a process 'in the wild' that Microsoft provides which is through Windows Error Reporting. If you are wanting to collect dump files from failed client processes you could sign up for Windows Error Reporting (I must admit I have never actually done it, but I did look into it and tried to get my current employer to allow me to do this, but it didn't end successfully). To sign up go to the Establish a Hardware/Desktop Account Page.
As far as what to do with dump files once you get them, you would be wanting to download the debugging tools for windows (part of the Windows SDK download) and/or the Debug Diag Tool (I must confess I am more of a debugging tools for windows user than a Debug Diag user). These will provide you with the tools to look into what is going on at a lower level. Obviously you can only go so far as you won't have access to private Microsoft symbols, but you do have access to public symbols and usually those are enough to give you a pretty good idea of the problem area.
Your primary tools will depend on how reproducible the issue is. If it is only reproducible on some client machines then you will have to rely on looking at a single dump file that you probably got a hold of from Windows Error Reporting. In this case what I would do is open it up using the appropriate version of Windbg (either x86 or x64) and look at what was going on at the time the dump was taken. Depending on how savvy you are depends on how far you can go. Probably a simple starter would be to run
.symfix
.reload
.loadby sos clr
!EEStack
This will load Microsoft public symbols, the sos extension dll for dealing with Managed code inspection, and then will dump the contents of the stack for each thread in the process. From looking at the names of the method that appear on the call stacks you might be able to get a pretty good idea of at least the area of the code where the lock is occuring.
You can go much farther than this as Windbg provides the ability to go pretty deep into deadlock analysis (for instance there is an extension available for Windbg called sosex that provides a command !dlk which can sometimes automate the detection of a deadlock for you from a single dump file. To load an extension dll into Windbg you just have to download it and then call .load fullpathtodll). If the problem is reproducible locally you might even be more successful with WPA/WPR or if you are really fortunate a simple procmon trace. These tools do have a pretty decent barrier to entry as they take some time to learn. But if you are really interested in the topic your best resources would be the Defrag Tools series on Channel9 and anything by Mario Hewardt (especially his book "Advanced .Net Debugging"). Again, getting familiar with these tools can take a bunch of time, but at the very least if you just know how to dump the contents of the stacks from a dump file you can sometimes get what you need just from that so a basic understanding of these tools can be beneficial as well.
I have seen a few different answers on SO that discourage the use of Debug.Print while debugging applications .. but nobody ever goes into exactly why its bad. I googled it, of course, but the results didn't turn up anything usable.
Can anyone clarify why Debug.Print is so bad?
It's noisy - all the debug statements end up mixed together.
It's easily missed - there's a ton of other output in that stream as well, easy to miss stuff.
It doesn't give enough context - there's no stack trace, no current variable values if you forget to include them, etc...
It only goes one place (the debug output) so it's hard to send to a disk file, database, etc.
Basically, it's no good for logging since you can't control where it goes, and it's no good for debugging because the debugger does everything better.
There's really nothing wrong with it, there are just better options.
If you're going to be outputting data you may as well log it. If you do that you actually get something back from the investment.
Additionally printing out variable info is less effective than setting a break point and inspecting those values in the debugger. Particularly in VS where these tools are excellent.
I have a computationally-expensive multi-threaded C# app that seems to crash consistently after 30-90 minutes of running. The error it gives is
The runtime has encountered a fatal error. The address of the error was at 0xec37ebae, on thread 0xbcc. The error code is 0xc0000005. This error may be a bug in the CLR or in the unsafe or non-verifiable portions of user code. Common sources of this bug include user marshaling errors for COM-interop or PInvoke, which may corrupt the stack.
(0xc0000005 is the error-code for Access Violation)
My app does not invoke any native code, or use any unsafe blocks, or even any non-CLS compliant types like uint. In fact, the line of code that the debugger says caused the crash is
overallLength += distanceTravelled;
Where both values are of type double
Given all this, I believe the crash must be due to a bug in the compiler or CLR or JIT. I'd like to figure out what causes it, or at the very least write a smaller reproduction to send into Microsoft, but I have no idea where to even begin. I've never had to view the CIL-binary, or the compiled JIT output, or the native stacktrace (there is no managed stacktrace at the time of the crash), so I'm not sure how. I can't even figure out how to view the state of all the variables at the time of the crash (VS unfortunately won't tell me like it does after managed-exceptions, and outputting them to console/a file would slow down the app 1000-fold, which is obviously not an option).
So, how do I go about debugging this?
[Edit] Compiled under VS 2010 SP1, running latest version of .Net 4.0 Client Profile. Apparently it's ".Net 4.0C/.Net 4.0E, .Net CLR 1.1.4322"
I'd like to figure out what causes it, or at the very least write a smaller reproduction to send into Microsoft, but I have no idea where to even begin.
"Smaller reproduction" definitely sounds like a great idea here... even if "smaller" won't mean "quicker to reproduce".
Before you even start, try to reproduce the error on another machine. If you can't reproduce it on another machine, that suggests a whole different set of tests to do - hardware, installation etc.
Also, check you're on the latest version of everything. It would be annoying to spend days debugging this (which is likely, I'm afraid) and then end up with a response of "Yes, we know about this - it was a bug in .NET 4 which was fixed in .NET 4.5" for example. If you can reproduce it on a variety of framework versions, that would be even better :)
Next, cut out everything you can in the program:
Does it have a user interface at all? If possible, remove that.
Does it use a database? See if you can remove all database access: definitely any output which isn't used later, and ideally input too. If you can hard code the input within the app, that would be ideal - but if not, files are simpler for reproductions than database access.
Is it data-sensitive? Again, without knowing much about the app it's hard to know whether this is useful, but assuming it's processing a lot of data, can you use a binary search to find a relatively small amount of data which causes the problem?
Does it have to be multi-threaded? If you can remove all the threading, obviously that may well then take much longer to reproduce the problem - but does it still happen at all?
Try removing bits of business logic: if your app is componentized appropriately, you can probably fake out whole significant components by first creating a stub implementation, and then simply removing the calls.
All of this will gradually reduce the size of the app until it's more manageable. At each step, you'll need to run the app again until it either crashes or you're convinced it won't crash. If you have a lot of machines available to you, that should help...
tl;dr Make sure you're compiling to .Net 4.5
This sounds suspiciously like the same error found here. From the MSDN page:
This bug can be encountered when the Garbage Collector is freeing and compacting memory. The error can happen when the Concurrent Garbage Collection is enabled and a certain combination of foreground Garbage Collection and background Garbage Collection occurs. When this situation happens you will see the same call stack over and over. On the heap you will see one free object and before it ends you will see another free object corrupting the heap.
The fix is to compile to .Net 4.5. If for some reason you can't do this, you can also disable concurrent garbage collection by disabling gcConcurrent in the app.config file:
<configuration>
<runtime>
<gcConcurrent enabled="false"/>
</runtime>
</configuration>
Or just compile to x86.
WinDbg is your friend:
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/tess/archive/2006/02/09/net-crash-managed-heap-corruption-calling-unmanaged-code.aspx
http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/23589/Get-Started-Debugging-Memory-Related-Issues-in-Net
http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/22245/Quick-start-to-using-WinDbg
Download Debug Diagnostic Tool v1.2
Run program
Add Rule "Crash"
Select "Specific Process"
on page Advanced Configuration set your exception if you know on which exception it fails or just leave this page as is
Set userdump location
Now wait for process to crash, log file is created by DebugDiag. Now activate tab Advanced Analysis, select Crash/Hang Analyzers in top list and dump file in lower list and hit Start Analysis. This will generate html report for you. Hopes you found usefull info in that report. If you have problem with analyze, upload html report somewhere and place url here so we can focus on it.
My app does not invoke any native code, or use any unsafe blocks, or
even any non-CLS compliant types like uint
You may think this, but threading, synchronization via semaphore, mutex it any handles all are native. .net is a layer over operating system, .net itself does not support pure clr code for multithreading apps, this is because OS already does it.
Most likely this is thread synchronization error. Probably multiple threads are trying to access shared resource like file etc that is outside clr boundary.
You may think you aren't accessing com etc, but when you call certain API like get desktop folder path etc it is called through shell com API.
You have following two options,
Publish your code so that we can review the bottleneck
Redesign your app using .net parallel threading framework, which includes variety of algorithms requiring CPU intensive operations.
Most likely programs fail after certain period of time as collections grow up and operations fail to execute before other thread interfere. For example, producer consumer problem, you will not notice any problem till producer will become slower or fail to finish its operation before consumer kicks in.
Bug in clr is rare, because clr is very stable. But poorly written code may lead error to appear as bug in clr. Clr can not and will never detect whether the bug is in your code or in clr itself.
Did you run a memory test for your machine as the one time I had comparable symptoms one of my dimms turned out to be faulty (a very good memorytester is included in Win7; http://www.tomstricks.com/how-to-test-your-ram-or-memory-with-windows-memory-diagnostic-tool-in-windows-7/)
It might also be a heating/throttling issue if your CPU gets too hot after this period of time. Although that would happen sooner imho.
There should be a dumpfile that you can analyze. If you never did this find someone who did, or send that to microsoft
I will suggest you open a support case via http://support.microsoft.com immediately, as the support guys can show you how to collect the necessary information.
Generally speaking, like #paulsm4 and #psulek said, you can utilize WinDbg or Debug Diag to capture crash dumps of the process, and within it, all necessary information is embedded. However, if this is the very first time you use those tools, you might be puzzled. Microsoft support team can provide you step by step guidance on them, or they can even set up a Live Meeting session with you to capture the data, as the program crashes so often.
Once you are familiar with the tools, in the future you can perform similar troubleshooting more easily,
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/lexli/archive/2009/08/23/when-the-application-program-crashes-on-windows.aspx
BTW, it is too early to say "I've found a bug". Though you cannot obviously find in your program a dependency on native code, it might still have a dependency on native code. We should not draw a conclusion before debugging further into the issue.
I honestly don't throw exceptions often. I catch them even less, ironically. I currently work in shop where we let them bubble up to avicode. For whatever reason, however, avicode isn't configured to capture some of the critical bits I need when these exceptions come bouncing back to my attention. Specifically, I'd like to see the parameter values and the class’s field data at the time of the exception.
I’d guess with the large suite of .Net services that I could create a static method to crawl up the stack, gather these bits and store them in a string that I could stick in my exception message. I really don't are how long such a method would take to execute as performance is no longer a concern when I hit one of these scenarios.
If it's possible, I'm sure someone has done it. If that's the case, I'm having a hard time finding it. I think any search containing "exception" brings back too many resutls.
Anyway, can this be done? If so, some examples or links would be great.
Thanks in advance for your time,
Robert
I am prepared to be wrong about this, but I do not think it is possible to extract parameter values by walking the stack. You certainly cannot do this with the StackTrace and StackFrame classes.
From a security perspective this makes sense because sensitive information could be embedded in the stack that unauthorized code should not have access to.
If the current stack frame does not catch the exception and record its parameter values into an Exception instance before rethrowing then I am afraid you are going to be out of luck.
I think you can use the CLR Debugging API to get out some more information than just the stacktrace, but I don't think it's easy.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb384548.aspx
Not sure if this is exactly what you are looking for, but as a consultant for AVIcode I can assure that it is a simple configuration change to collect parameters and member variables by namespace, class or method. You can even go as far as configuring diagnostic mode and collect local variables. Is this application in production? In production but I would be specific to a class to enable.
I just ran into one of the most mind boggling errors ever. false == true What information would you guys need to confirm/debug this behavior? I've never seen anything like it.
VS2008 sp1
Debug Mode | Any Cpu
IIS 7.5
Edit:
I did a clean->rebuild and still the same.
Here's the assembly and registers. I don't know how to read this, but maybe it could help someone else.
I suppose your PDB files are not in phase and you have differences in what's really executed and what Visual Studio sees as a line number. Try rebuilding. We all know that it is impossible to have true = false, or the world as we know it may change :-)
Does it actually throw the error? The debugger can often highlight the wrong lines if you feed it the wrong pdb, so this could be a false lead. It is also trivial to reproduce using the "immediate" pane to change the value after the test.
If result was a field or a captured variable, it could also be set by external code (perhaps on another thread).
If result wasn't a bool but your own custom type, you could just override ==, or provide a custom true/false operator.
Probably the source does not correspond to the running version or there's a bug in the debugger.
Part of the problem is that you're assuming the debugger is 100% correct. It in fact is not and is subject to a number of situations where values can have incorrect or misleading displays. The most common causes of this are ...
Mismatched PDB files. This will usually lead to at least a warning dialog in the debugger about mismatched source files but not always
Simple data inspection or display error by the underlying expression evaluator. Not likely in this case as it's a simple local and a primitive type.
Optimizations causing the data to be displayed incorrectly.
But it in fact is almost certainly not false. The easiest way to verify this is to use a Debug.WriteLine call to print the value out to the output window.
Are you sure that's the exception being thrown? My hunch is that your method isContextSignatureValid is actually throwing an exception, but the Visual Studio debugger can get ahead of itself sometimes and highlight a line that is not actually throwing the exception.
Maybe you moved the current instruction pointer (yellow arrow) with your mouse inadvertently while in break mode... It happened to me once and I flipped out. :-)
Just to add a little suggestion:
If you ever get confusing results from the debugger, stick a Console.WriteLine() in there and get the code itself to tell you what is going on. This can often clear up confusion.
(You can also get an effect like this when debugging release code, but you said it was a debug build which eliminates that suspect)
I've seen this sort of thing before. A co-worker was convinced he'd uncovered a bug in the .Net Framework or CLR. In the end it was just an old assembly or pdb synch problem.