这让我很难过。我试图优化 Noda Time 的一些测试,我们有一些类型初始化程序检查。我想在 将 所有内容加载到新的AppDomain. 令我惊讶的是,尽管我的 代码NullReferenceException中没有空值,但对此进行了一个小测试。它 仅 在没有调试信息的情况下编译时抛出异常。
AppDomain
NullReferenceException
这是一个简短但完整的程序来演示该问题:
using System; class Test { static Test() {} static void Main() { var cctor = typeof(Test).TypeInitializer; Console.WriteLine("Got initializer? {0}", cctor != null); } }
以及编译和输出的成绩单:
c:\Users\Jon\Test>csc Test.cs Microsoft (R) Visual C# Compiler version 4.0.30319.17626 for Microsoft (R) .NET Framework 4.5 Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. c:\Users\Jon\Test>test Unhandled Exception: System.NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object. at System.RuntimeType.GetConstructorImpl(BindingFlags bindingAttr, Binder bin der, CallingConventions callConvention, Type[] types, ParameterModifier[] modifi ers) at Test.Main() c:\Users\Jon\Test>csc /debug+ Test.cs Microsoft (R) Visual C# Compiler version 4.0.30319.17626 for Microsoft (R) .NET Framework 4.5 Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. c:\Users\Jon\Test>test Got initializer? True
现在您会注意到我正在使用 .NET 4.5(候选发布版)——这 可能 与此处相关。用各种其他原始框架(特别是“vanilla”.NET 4)测试它对我来说有点棘手,但如果其他人可以轻松访问具有其他框架的机器,我会对结果感兴趣。
其他详情:
NodaTime.dll
Test.cs
有任何想法吗?框架错误?
编辑:好奇和好奇。如果您Console.WriteLine拨打电话:
Console.WriteLine
using System; class Test { static Test() {} static void Main() { var cctor = typeof(Test).TypeInitializer; } }
它现在 仅 在使用csc /o- /debug-. 如果您打开优化, ( /o+) 它会起作用。但是,如果您Console.WriteLine按照原始版本包含调用,则两个版本都将失败。
csc /o- /debug-
/o+
与csc test.cs:
csc test.cs
(196c.1874): Access violation - code c0000005 (first chance) mscorlib_ni!System.RuntimeType.GetConstructorImpl(System.Reflection.BindingFlags, System.Reflection.Binder, System.Reflection.CallingConventions, System.Type[], System.Reflection.ParameterModifier[])+0xa3: 000007fe`e5735403 488b4608 mov rax,qword ptr [rsi+8] ds:00000000`00000008=????????????????
尝试从[rsi+8]何时加载@rsi为 NULL。让我们检查一下函数:
[rsi+8]
@rsi
0:000> ln 000007fe`e5735403 (000007fe`e5735360) mscorlib_ni!System.RuntimeType.GetConstructorImpl(System.Reflection.BindingFlags, System.Reflection.Binder, System.Reflection.CallingConventions, System.Type[], System.Reflection.ParameterModifier[])+0xa3 0:000> uf 000007fe`e5735360 Flow analysis was incomplete, some code may be missing mscorlib_ni!System.RuntimeType.GetConstructorImpl(System.Reflection.BindingFlags, System.Reflection.Binder, System.Reflection.CallingConventions, System.Type[], System.Reflection.ParameterModifier[]): 000007fe`e5735360 53 push rbx 000007fe`e5735361 55 push rbp 000007fe`e5735362 56 push rsi 000007fe`e5735363 57 push rdi 000007fe`e5735364 4154 push r12 000007fe`e5735366 4883ec30 sub rsp,30h 000007fe`e573536a 498bf8 mov rdi,r8 000007fe`e573536d 8bea mov ebp,edx 000007fe`e573536f 48c744242800000000 mov qword ptr [rsp+28h],0 000007fe`e5735378 488bb42480000000 mov rsi,qword ptr [rsp+80h] 000007fe`e5735380 4889742420 mov qword ptr [rsp+20h],rsi 000007fe`e5735385 41b903000000 mov r9d,3 ... mscorlib_ni!System.RuntimeType.GetConstructorImpl(System.Reflection.BindingFlags, System.Reflection.Binder, System.Reflection.CallingConventions, System.Type[], System.Reflection.ParameterModifier[])+0x97: 000007fe`e57353f7 488b4b08 mov rcx,qword ptr [rbx+8] 000007fe`e57353fb 85c9 test ecx,ecx 000007fe`e57353fd 0f848e000000 je mscorlib_ni!System.RuntimeType.GetConstructorImpl(System.Reflection.BindingFlags, System.Reflection.Binder, System.Reflection.CallingConventions, System.Type[], System.Reflection.ParameterModifier[])+0x131 (000007fe`e5735491) mscorlib_ni!System.RuntimeType.GetConstructorImpl(System.Reflection.BindingFlags, System.Reflection.Binder, System.Reflection.CallingConventions, System.Type[], System.Reflection.ParameterModifier[])+0xa3: 000007fe`e5735403 488b4608 mov rax,qword ptr [rsi+8] 000007fe`e5735407 85c0 test eax,eax 000007fe`e5735409 7545 jne mscorlib_ni!System.RuntimeType.GetConstructorImpl(System.Reflection.BindingFlags, System.Reflection.Binder, System.Reflection.CallingConventions, System.Type[], System.Reflection.ParameterModifier[])+0xf0 (000007fe`e5735450) ...
@rsi从开头加载,[rsp+20h]因此它必须由调用者传递。让我们看看调用者:
[rsp+20h]
0:000> k3 Child-SP RetAddr Call Site 00000000`001fec70 000007fe`8d450110 mscorlib_ni!System.RuntimeType.GetConstructorImpl(System.Reflection.BindingFlags, System.Reflection.Binder, System.Reflection.CallingConventions, System.Type[], System.Reflection.ParameterModifier[])+0xa3 00000000`001fecd0 000007fe`ecb6e073 image00000000_01120000!Test.Main()+0x60 00000000`001fed20 000007fe`ecb6dcb2 clr!CoUninitializeEE+0x7ae1f 0:000> ln 000007fe`8d450110 (000007fe`8d4500b0) image00000000_01120000!Test.Main()+0x60 0:000> uf 000007fe`8d4500b0 image00000000_01120000!Test.Main(): 000007fe`8d4500b0 53 push rbx 000007fe`8d4500b1 4883ec40 sub rsp,40h 000007fe`8d4500b5 e8a69ba658 call mscorlib_ni!System.Console.get_In() (000007fe`e5eb9c60) 000007fe`8d4500ba 4c8bd8 mov r11,rax 000007fe`8d4500bd 498b03 mov rax,qword ptr [r11] 000007fe`8d4500c0 488b5048 mov rdx,qword ptr [rax+48h] 000007fe`8d4500c4 498bcb mov rcx,r11 000007fe`8d4500c7 ff5238 call qword ptr [rdx+38h] 000007fe`8d4500ca 488d0d7737eeff lea rcx,[000007fe`8d333848] 000007fe`8d4500d1 e88acb715f call clr!CoUninitializeEE+0x79a0c (000007fe`ecb6cc60) 000007fe`8d4500d6 4c8bd8 mov r11,rax 000007fe`8d4500d9 48b92012531200000000 mov rcx,12531220h 000007fe`8d4500e3 488b09 mov rcx,qword ptr [rcx] 000007fe`8d4500e6 498b03 mov rax,qword ptr [r11] 000007fe`8d4500e9 4c8b5068 mov r10,qword ptr [rax+68h] 000007fe`8d4500ed 48c744242800000000 mov qword ptr [rsp+28h],0 000007fe`8d4500f6 48894c2420 mov qword ptr [rsp+20h],rcx 000007fe`8d4500fb 41b903000000 mov r9d,3 000007fe`8d450101 4533c0 xor r8d,r8d 000007fe`8d450104 ba38000000 mov edx,38h 000007fe`8d450109 498bcb mov rcx,r11 000007fe`8d45010c 41ff5228 call qword ptr [r10+28h] 000007fe`8d450110 48bb1032531200000000 mov rbx,12533210h 000007fe`8d45011a 488b1b mov rbx,qword ptr [rbx] 000007fe`8d45011d 33d2 xor edx,edx 000007fe`8d45011f 488bc8 mov rcx,rax 000007fe`8d450122 e829452e58 call mscorlib_ni!System.Reflection.ConstructorInfo.op_Equality(System.Reflection.ConstructorInfo, System.Reflection.ConstructorInfo) (000007fe`e5734650) 000007fe`8d450127 0fb6c8 movzx ecx,al 000007fe`8d45012a 33c0 xor eax,eax 000007fe`8d45012c 85c9 test ecx,ecx 000007fe`8d45012e 0f94c0 sete al 000007fe`8d450131 0fb6c8 movzx ecx,al 000007fe`8d450134 894c2430 mov dword ptr [rsp+30h],ecx 000007fe`8d450138 488d542430 lea rdx,[rsp+30h] 000007fe`8d45013d 488d0d24224958 lea rcx,[mscorlib_ni+0x682368 (000007fe`e58e2368)] 000007fe`8d450144 e807246a5f call clr+0x2550 (000007fe`ecaf2550) 000007fe`8d450149 488bd0 mov rdx,rax 000007fe`8d45014c 488bcb mov rcx,rbx 000007fe`8d45014f e81cab2758 call mscorlib_ni!System.Console.WriteLine(System.String, System.Object) (000007fe`e56cac70) 000007fe`8d450154 90 nop 000007fe`8d450155 4883c440 add rsp,40h 000007fe`8d450159 5b pop rbx 000007fe`8d45015a c3 ret
(我的反汇编显示是System.Console.get_In因为我Console.GetLine()在 test.cs 中添加了一个有机会闯入调试器。我验证它不会改变行为)。
System.Console.get_In
Console.GetLine()
我们在这个调用中:(000007fe8d45010c 41ff5228 call qword ptr [r10+28h]我们的 AV 帧 ret 地址是紧随其后的指令call)。
000007fe8d45010c 41ff5228 call qword ptr [r10+28h]
call
让我们将其与编译时发生的情况进行比较csc /debug test.cs。我们可以设置一个bp 000007fee5735360,幸运的是模块加载到相同的地址。在加载的指令上@rsi:
csc /debug test.cs
bp 000007fee5735360
0:000> r rax=000007fee58e2f30 rbx=00000000027c6258 rcx=00000000027c6258 rdx=0000000000000038 rsi=00000000002debd8 rdi=0000000000000000 rip=000007fee5735378 rsp=00000000002de990 rbp=0000000000000038 r8=0000000000000000 r9=0000000000000003 r10=000007fee58831c8 r11=00000000002de9c0 r12=0000000000000000 r13=00000000002dedc0 r14=00000000002dec58 r15=0000000000000004 iopl=0 nv up ei pl nz na po nc cs=0033 ss=002b ds=002b es=002b fs=0053 gs=002b efl=00000206 mscorlib_ni!System.RuntimeType.GetConstructorImpl(System.Reflection.BindingFlags, System.Reflection.Binder, System.Reflection.CallingConventions, System.Type[], System.Reflection.ParameterModifier[])+0x18: 000007fe`e5735378 488bb42480000000 mov rsi,qword ptr [rsp+80h] ss:00000000`002dea10=a0627c0200000000
请注意,它@rsi是 00000000002debd8。单步执行该函数表明,该地址稍后将在坏的 exe 炸弹发生的地方被取消引用(即@rsi不改变)。堆栈非常有趣 ,因为它显示了一个额外的帧 :
0:000> k3 Child-SP RetAddr Call Site 00000000`002de990 000007fe`e5eddf68 mscorlib_ni!System.RuntimeType.GetConstructorImpl(System.Reflection.BindingFlags, System.Reflection.Binder, System.Reflection.CallingConventions, System.Type[], System.Reflection.ParameterModifier[])+0x18 00000000`002de9f0 000007fe`8d460119 mscorlib_ni!System.Type.get_TypeInitializer()+0x48 00000000`002dea30 000007fe`ecb6e073 good!Test.Main()+0x49*** WARNING: Unable to verify checksum for good.exe 0:000> ln 000007fe`e5eddf68 (000007fe`e5eddf20) mscorlib_ni!System.Type.get_TypeInitializer()+0x48 0:000> uf 000007fe`e5eddf20 mscorlib_ni!System.Type.get_TypeInitializer(): 000007fe`e5eddf20 53 push rbx 000007fe`e5eddf21 4883ec30 sub rsp,30h 000007fe`e5eddf25 488bd9 mov rbx,rcx 000007fe`e5eddf28 ba22010000 mov edx,122h 000007fe`e5eddf2d b901000000 mov ecx,1 000007fe`e5eddf32 e8d1a075ff call CORINFO_HELP_GETSHARED_GCSTATIC_BASE (000007fe`e5638008) 000007fe`e5eddf37 488b88f0010000 mov rcx,qword ptr [rax+1F0h] 000007fe`e5eddf3e 488b03 mov rax,qword ptr [rbx] 000007fe`e5eddf41 4c8b5068 mov r10,qword ptr [rax+68h] 000007fe`e5eddf45 48c744242800000000 mov qword ptr [rsp+28h],0 000007fe`e5eddf4e 48894c2420 mov qword ptr [rsp+20h],rcx 000007fe`e5eddf53 41b903000000 mov r9d,3 000007fe`e5eddf59 4533c0 xor r8d,r8d 000007fe`e5eddf5c ba38000000 mov edx,38h 000007fe`e5eddf61 488bcb mov rcx,rbx 000007fe`e5eddf64 41ff5228 call qword ptr [r10+28h] 000007fe`e5eddf68 90 nop 000007fe`e5eddf69 4883c430 add rsp,30h 000007fe`e5eddf6d 5b pop rbx 000007fe`e5eddf6e c3 ret 0:000> ln 000007fe`8d460119
这个调用和call qword ptr [r10+28h]我们之前看到的一样,所以在糟糕的情况下,这个函数可能被内联在 中Main(),所以有一个额外的框架是一个红鲱鱼。如果我们看一下这个的准备,call qword ptr [r10+28h]我们会注意到这个指令:mov qword ptr [rsp+20h],rcx。这就是加载最终被取消引用为的地址@rsi。在好的情况下,@rcx加载方式如下:
call qword ptr [r10+28h]
Main()
mov qword ptr [rsp+20h],rcx
@rcx
000007fe`e5eddf32 e8d1a075ff call CORINFO_HELP_GETSHARED_GCSTATIC_BASE (000007fe`e5638008) 000007fe`e5eddf37 488b88f0010000 mov rcx,qword ptr [rax+1F0h]
在糟糕的情况下,它看起来非常不同:
000007fe`8d4600d9 48b92012721200000000 mov rcx,12721220h 000007fe`8d4600e3 488b09 mov rcx,qword ptr [rcx]
这是非常不同的。与调用 CORINFO_HELP_GETSHARED_GCSTATIC_BASE 并读取最终作为导致 AV 从1F0返回结构中的某个成员偏移的关键指针的好案例不同,优化的代码从静态地址加载它。当然 12721220h 包含 NULL:
1F0
0:000> dp 12721220h L8 00000000`12721220 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 00000000`12721230 00000000`00000000 00000000`02722198 00000000`12721240 00000000`027221c8 00000000`027221f8 00000000`12721250 00000000`02722228 00000000`02722258
不幸的是,我现在深入挖掘为时已晚,分解CORINFO_HELP_GETSHARED_GCSTATIC_BASE远非微不足道。我发布这篇文章是希望对 CLR 内部知识更了解的人能说得通(如您所见,我真的只从本机指令 POV 考虑了这个问题,完全忽略了 IL)。
CORINFO_HELP_GETSHARED_GCSTATIC_BASE