C++ exceptions slow down 3dsmax when under visual studio debugger - c++

I'm trying to debug a C++ 3dsmax plugin using Visual Studio 2019 and whenever I'm attached things run about 1000 times slower- an operation that would take 10 seconds has already taken about an hour. This seems to be due to a wall of thrown exceptions constantly spamming the output like this:
Exception thrown at 0x00007FFB97AB9709 in 3dsmax.exe: Microsoft C++ exception: [rethrow] at memory location 0x0000000000000000.
Unfortunately, this exception is in 3dsmax code, not my code, and so I'm unable to fix it. It doesn't seem to crash the software or cause any problems, it just slows down plugin debugging terribly when I attach. 3dsmax is already finicky when I try to attach, so attaching later in this process is not really an option.
I've read a few other similar questions, but none have offered solutions. These are C++ exceptions, so comments about Just My Code, etc. don't help as this is unmanaged. I've tried hiding the exceptions from the output window but it makes no difference. And the only exception settings I've managed to find are whether or not to break when encountering an exception (which I don't)- I have found nothing that just says to completely ignore exceptions and not slow down when encountering one.
Has anyone encountered anything that helps Visual Studio not slow down when encountering C++ exceptions?

Related

Interpreting Access Violation Exceptions?

We have a custom application we use built around VB/C++ code.
This code will run for days, weeks, months, without this throwing up an exception error.
I'm trying to learn more about how this error is thrown, and how to interpret (if you can) the error listed when an exception is thrown. I've googled some information and read the Microsoft provided error description, but I'm still stuck with the task of trouble shooting something that occurs once in a blue moon. There is no known set of interactions with the software that causes this and appears to happen randomly.
Is the first exception the root cause? Is it all the way down the stack call? Can anyone provide any insight on how to read these codes so I could interpret where I actually need to look.
Any information or guidance on reading the exception or making any use of it, and then trouble shooting it would be helpful. The test below is copied from windows log when the event was thrown.
Thanks in advance for any help.
Application: Epic.exe Framework Version: v4.0.30319 Description: The process was terminated due to an unhandled exception. Exception Info: System.AccessViolationException [![enter image description here][1]][1]
at MemMap.ComBuf.IsCharAvailable(Int32)
at HMI.frmPmacStat.RefreshTimer_Elapsed(System.Object, System.Timers.ElapsedEventArgs)
at System.Timers.Timer.MyTimerCallback(System.Object)
at System.Threading.TimerQueueTimer.CallCallbackInContext(System.Object)
at System.Threading.ExecutionContext.RunInternal(System.Threading.ExecutionContext,
System.Threading.ContextCallback, System.Object, Boolean)
at System.Threading.ExecutionContext.Run(System.Threading.ExecutionContext,
System.Threading.ContextCallback, System.Object, Boolean)
at System.Threading.TimerQueueTimer.CallCallback()
at System.Threading.TimerQueueTimer.Fire()
at System.Threading.TimerQueue.FireQueuedTimerCompletion(System.Object)
at System.Threading.QueueUserWorkItemCallback.System.Threading.IThreadPoolWorkItem.ExecuteWorkItem()
at System.Threading.ThreadPoolWorkQueue.Dispatch()
at System.Threading._ThreadPoolWaitCallback.PerformWaitCallback()
There are exceptions that are thrown by the c++ runtime environment, as a result of executing a throw expression, and there are other types of errors caused by the operating system or hardware trapping your instruction. Invalid access to memory is generally not thrown by code in c++, but is a side effect of evaluating an expression trying to access memory at an invalid address, resulting in the OS signaling the process, usually killing it. Because it's outside C++, it tends to be platform specific, but typical errors are:
reading a null pointer
using a pointer to an object that has been deleted
going outside an array's valid range of elements
using invalidated iterators into STL containers
Generally speaking, you can test for null and array bounds at runtime to detect the problem before it happens. Using a dangling pointer is more difficult to track down, because the time between the delete and the mis-use of that pointer can be long, and it can be difficult to find why it happened without a memory debugger, such as valgrind. Using smart pointers instead of raw pointers can help mitigate the problems of mis-managing memory, and can help avoid such errors.
Invalid iterators are subset of the general dangling pointer problem, but are common enough to be worth mentioning as their own category. Understanding your containers and which operations invalidate them is crucial, and some implementations can be compiled in "debug mode" which can help detect use of invalidated iterators.
As others have noted, this type of error is tricky to identify without digging into the code and running tests (automated or manual). The more pieces of the system you can pull out and still reproduce it, the better. Divide and conquer is your friend here.
Beyond that, it all depends how important it is for you to resolve this and how much effort you're willing to put in. There are at least three classes of tools that can help with such intermittent problems:
Application monitors that track potential errors as your application runs. These tend to slow your program significantly (10x or more slowdown). Examples include:
Microsoft's Application Verifier
Open-source and cross-platform Dr. Memory
Google's Crashpad. Unlike the previous two programs, this one requires instrumenting your code. It is also (allegedly -- haven't tried it) easier to use with helpers like Backtrace's commercial integration for analyzing Crashpad output
Google's Sanitizers - free and some are built into gcc and clang. There's also a Windows port of Address Sanitizer, but a cursory look suggests it may be a little bit of a second-class citizen.
If you can run and repro it also run it on Linux, you could use valgrind; rr (see this CppCast ep) which is a free extension for gdb that records and replays your program so you can record a debug session that crashed and then step through it to see what went wrong; and/or UndoDB and friends from Undo software, which is a more sophisticated, commercial product like rr.
Static analysis of the code. This is a set of tools that looks for common errors in your code. It generally has a low signal-to-noise ratio, so there are a lot of minor things to dig through if your run it on a large, existing project (best to start a project using these things from the beginning if possible). That said, many of the warnings are invaluable. Examples:
Most compilers have a subset of this functionality built in. If you're using Visual Studio, add /W4 /WX to your compilation flags for the C++ code to force maximum warnings, then fix all the warnings. For gcc and clang, add '-Wall -Wpedantic -Werror` to enforce no warnings.
PVS-Studio (commercial)
PC-Lint (commercial)
If you can instrument the code to write log messages, something like Debugview++ may be of assistance.
Things get harder if you have multithreading going on, which it looks like you do, because the non-determinism gets harder to track, there are new classes of possible errors that are introduced, and some of the above tools won't work well (e.g., I think rr is single-threaded only). Beyond a full IDE like Visual Studio, you'd need to go with something like Intel's Inspector (formerly Intel Thread Checker), or on Linux, Valgrind's Helgrind and DRD and ThreadSanitizer (in the sanitizers above, but also Linux only AFAIK). But hopefully this list gives you a place to start.

Don't know where exception was thrown using google-test

We are using Google Test as our C++ unit testing framework. But I ran into a painful situation and don't know how to deal with.
Basically, when there is an uncaught exception in the code, I got the following error message printed in the console and get a FAILED. Obviously, the exception is captures by google test. However, I have no information at all where is the exception was throw.
unknown file: error: SEH exception with code 0xc000005 thrown in the test body.
What I can do is debug and step through the code and I will eventually figure out where the problem is. But this is not very efficient as the project is big.
I want the debugger to stop at the line of uncaught exception and give me a nice call stack. Is there any settings in google test that I don't know of? Any other work around or suggestions will be very much appreciated.
Edit: I am looking for something like the following under Windows
Finally according to the answers, I found this settings for visual studio and everything works as the way I want now :)
At work the approach I use is to run only the failing testcase using gdb like so:
gdb /path/to/test
catch throw
r --gtest_filter='Test.Testcase' --gmock_verbose=info
bt
With visual studio, I suspect you should be able to start your binary with arguments as above, and set a breakpoint to any throw, then take a look at the backtrace.
An SEH Exception is NOT a C++ exception.
It is a windows exception that is throw outside of the standard C++ framework for exception handing (there is a different syntax for catching them).
The best way to find the location is to run this inside DevStudio. Its been a while but I am sure DevStudio has an option to break when SEH exception is thrown. Just turn this on and your debugger will stop at the throw point and allow you to debug.
See: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/d14azbfh.aspx
As noted by #MatthiasVegh you should pass the name of the test as well so you don't have to run through all the tests.
That is not possible since C++ doesn't keep stack trace in the exception object and even if gtest had some smart catching mechanism it would have no means to know where the exception came from. The best you can do is to store some information in the exception yourself and check it in the test case.

How do I enable run-time checking of floats in C++

I seem to remember at a previous job, when tracking down a certain bug I added a call to a function that made sure that floating point errors got reported in some way. I don't remember exactly how - probably a callback, or maybe it caused a break in Visual Studio immediately when it happened.
Tried searching for this but got nothing. Does this ring a bell for anyone? This is for a Windows game, if that matters.
(I'm not talking about enabling first-chance exceptions in Visual Studio, I want to catch it "live" as well).
It's called the floating-point environment. References:
http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/numeric/fenv (C++11)
http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009604599/basedefs/fenv.h.html (Unix)
To get exceptions to immediately halt your program, use platform-specific functions:
http://www.gnu.org/s/hello/manual/libc/Control-Functions.html (glibc)
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/e9b52ceh.aspx (Windows)
also: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/5z4bw5h5.aspx to get C++ exceptions; I think this is what you were after.

C++ exception handling with source code line info

Is there a way catch an exception like access violation and get information about on which line an exception occurred? This would be very good for debugging purposes, especially for testers..
My environment is Windows with VC++ on VS2008
An access violation is not an exception in C++ terms, so the answer is in general "no". Concieveably, your specific implementation might have a feature that turns access violations into C++ exceptions - you need to specify what compiler & platform you are using.
In case you really want to log info about C++ exceptions (AV is not one) thrown from your code, you can use macros __FILE__ and __LINE__ within constructors of your exception types.
If you catch the SEH exception using a __catch handler you can then access the thread context at the time of the exception and then use StackWalk64 to dump the call stack at the point where the exception was generated. Note that as I mentioned here: Printing the stack trace in C++ (MSVC)? StackWalker by Jochen Kalmbach [MVP VC++] and available on codeproject is probably the easiest way to do this. It wraps up all of the details of dealing with the underlying StackWalk64 API.
Alternatively you could the same solution that I proposed here: How to catch divide-by-zero error in Visual Studio 2008 C++? to convert the Windows Structured Exceptions into C++ exceptions and capture the stack trace as shown above at the point where you translate the exception. This would give you a C++ exception with a stack trace like you get in C# or Java.
I'm not sure why testers would need to know which line an exception occurred.
The developers might want to know, though. But a better approach is the following:
Include the information about class and method with each PROGRAM exception. These are exceptions that should NOT have happened.
This should be output by whatever logs your exceptions. Your program does catch and log every exception, doesn't it? If not, it should.
Make sure your methods are small enough that the above is enough information to easy track down a bug. If you need line information as well, then your methods are too large and your exceptions are not specific enough.
In MSVC you can set the debugger to break when any exception or things like an access violation happen buy going to debug->Exceptions and checking the appropriate box.
Note that access violations are not C++ exceptions and will be handled differently on different systems. In Windows you can trap them with a structured exception handler. In unixy systems it will usually core dump. You can usually get a stacktrace from that.
For msdev / Windows, during development, always have your linker generate a MAP file.
When Windows throws up an access violation, and it's your code (not library), you can use the address to match up function / data in the MAP file and get within a few lines of the offender. At a minimum, you'll know the function/method.
That's really a compiler question.
If you want to know if it is possible for a compiler to provide, the answer is yes. I know multiple Ada compilers that provide tracebacks for unhandled exceptions, so it is clearly possible. This includes the gcc-based Gnat, so if the C++ compiler uses any of the same facilities for its exceptions, the support for doing that should already be there.
On unix type systems a Access violation generates a SEGV or BUS signal. This normally causes the application to core dump. You could always write your own signal handler. From there you could probably generate a stack-dump using the glibc before core dumping.
A core dump generally give you all this for wasy analysis in gdb.
My answer refers to Windows only. You have quite a few options:
Without changing your code -
Avoid catching exceptions (at least ones you do not expect), and let your app just crash. Configure good ol' dr. watson (drwtsn32.exe) to create a crash dump, and open that dump in your debugger. You'll get the exact line of code there.
Use adPlus (from the windbg installation) to monitor your app's run, and create a dump when an exception is thrown.
From within your code, you can -
Easily walk the stack when a structured exception is thrown. See Jochen Kalmbach's stack walker for example.
Use this weird hack to walk the stack when a C++ exception is thrown.
Finally, quite a lot of questions have been asked here on this issue. Look around, and you'll get additional answers.
On one project I worked on, the root class of the exception hierarchy used captured a callstack in the constructor in case that information was needed later for debugging after the exception was caught. It was a decent idea, although if you're catching and 'handling' the exception, exactly when it was thrown shouldn't really matter all that much.
To put it another way, if you care about this info (context of "who" threw it), you probably shouldn't be using an exception to report this condition, or potentially you shouldn't be catching the exception in the first place. Uncaught exceptions cause crashes, giving you a crash dump at the point the exception was thrown.
On windows, the C runtime system function _set_se_translator() takes a simple static function with signature
void f(int, EXCEPTION_POINTERS*)
neither of which argument you totally need. In the body of f, throw your favorite exception. Call the function near the beginning of your program. The documentation is reasonable for microsoft.
You can do all manner of additional stuff with this function.
The google breakpad project has many good things. Among them are means to convert a crash address to file, line, and function name using build symbols and the debuginfo dll.

C++ Exception code lookup

Knowing an exception code, is there a way to find out more about what the actual exception that was thrown means?
My exception in question:
0x64487347
Exception address: 0x1
The call stack shows no information.
I'm reviewing a .dmp of a crash and not actually debugging in Visual Studio.
A true C++ exception thrown from Microsoft's runtime will have an SEH code of 0xe06d7363 (E0 + 'msc'). You have some other exception.
.NET generates SEH exceptions with the code 0xe0434f4d (E0 + 'COM').
NT's status codes are documented in ntstatus.h, and generally start 0x80 (warnings) or 0xC0 (errors). The most famous is 0xC0000005, STATUS_ACCESS_VIOLATION.
Because you're reviewing a crash dump I'll assume it came in from a customer and you cannot easily reproduce the fault with more instrumentation.
I don't have much help to offer save to note that the exception code 0x64487347 is ASCII "dShG", and developers often use the initials of the routine or fault condition when making up magic numbers like this.
A little Googling turned up one hit for dHsg in the proper context, the name of a function in a Google Book search for "Using Visual C++ 6" By Kate Gregory. Unfortunately that alone was not helpful.
If you know which block threw the exceptioon, can you put more specific handlers in the catch block to try and isolate it that way?
Are you throwing an exception that you rolled yourself?
Edit: I forgot to point you towards this article on Visual C++ exceptions which I've found to be quite useful.
Rob