Status Update
Comments
da...@google.com <da...@google.com> #2
1. Have you saw crash in real device or only in simulators?
2. Do you use dynamic feature for language ID?
ap...@google.com <ap...@google.com> #3
Tested on Android 12 Emulator with custom executor, but cannot repro this issue.
el...@google.com <el...@google.com>
ma...@justpinch.com <ma...@justpinch.com> #4
-
Second crash in the description is from a real device. Experienced it myself on two different Xiaomi phones, plus lots of crashes from users in the Google Play console.
-
Dynamic features are not used in the application.
As a wild guess, I have downgraded build tools from 31.0.0 to 30.0.3, compileSdk from 31 to 30, and moved all work with Language ID to the service in a separate process (just to be sure that crash can kill secondary process instead of main). This combination is in beta for 2 days by now and I don't see any SIGSEGV crashes.
da...@google.com <da...@google.com> #5
Hmm, I feel the crash might be something related to separate/secondary process.
I also changed compileSdk and targetSDK to 31 but still cannot repro this issue.
ma...@justpinch.com <ma...@justpinch.com> #6
On the contrary, there was no separate process before, when crashes started.
In the new build (with the aforementioned changes) I can see SIGSEGV crash, but only one instead of dozens and it has a bit different backtrace:
signal 11 (SIGSEGV), code 1 (SEGV_MAPERR)
liblanguage_id_jni.so (offset 0x11e000)
backtrace:
#00 pc 000000000003c7c0 /data/app/azagroup.reedy-mF7zTu2bv_ELlbFArwNgqA==/split_config.arm64_v8a.apk!lib/arm64-v8a/liblanguage_id_jni.so (offset 0x11e000)
#00 pc 000000000003b960 /data/app/azagroup.reedy-mF7zTu2bv_ELlbFArwNgqA==/split_config.arm64_v8a.apk!lib/arm64-v8a/liblanguage_id_jni.so (offset 0x11e000)
#00 pc 000000000003bb48 /data/app/azagroup.reedy-mF7zTu2bv_ELlbFArwNgqA==/split_config.arm64_v8a.apk!lib/arm64-v8a/liblanguage_id_jni.so (offset 0x11e000)
#00 pc 000000000003bafc /data/app/azagroup.reedy-mF7zTu2bv_ELlbFArwNgqA==/split_config.arm64_v8a.apk!lib/arm64-v8a/liblanguage_id_jni.so (offset 0x11e000)
#00 pc 0000000000036c98 /data/app/azagroup.reedy-mF7zTu2bv_ELlbFArwNgqA==/split_config.arm64_v8a.apk!lib/arm64-v8a/liblanguage_id_jni.so (offset 0x11e000)
#00 pc 0000000000032714 /data/app/azagroup.reedy-mF7zTu2bv_ELlbFArwNgqA==/split_config.arm64_v8a.apk!lib/arm64-v8a/liblanguage_id_jni.so (offset 0x11e000)
#00 pc 0000000000031cac /data/app/azagroup.reedy-mF7zTu2bv_ELlbFArwNgqA==/split_config.arm64_v8a.apk!lib/arm64-v8a/liblanguage_id_jni.so (offset 0x11e000)
#00 pc 0000000000057438 /data/app/azagroup.reedy-mF7zTu2bv_ELlbFArwNgqA==/oat/arm64/base.odex (offset 0x57000)
Description
Component used:androidx.room:room-*
Version used: 2.3.0, 2.4.0-alpha02
Devices/Android versions reproduced on: N/A -> code-gen error (kapt)
The documentation on states:
@Transaction
But unless I'm misunderstanding what this is trying to communicate, reality seems to be different.
Given the following dao:
Although implementations are generated, errors are thrown for the
@Transaction
annotated functions returningLiveData
andFlowable
:This seems to contradict the earlier statement from the documentation on
@Transaction
? Is there another way to use@Transaction
with a deferred/async return type?What's also interesting is that the
@Transaction
annotated function returning aFlow
does not yield any errors. Isn'tFlow
also a deferred/async return type? Does this mean that Room can in fact guarantee that all queries in the method are performed on the same thread? If so, how?The generated code looks like this:
This function is no longer deferred, because the transactional operations involve blocking I/O, and there are assertions in place that will fail if this is called from the main thread. And even if we were to make this function suspendable (we would then have a suspendable function returning a Flow?🤨), it would still not be main-safe.
In conclusion, I suspect:
@Transaction
is no longer accurate?@Transaction
annotation returning aFlow
should also yield a code-gen error?