R8 removes enum class values, despite usage from generated code [339085669]

WAI

Bug

Status Update

No update yet.

Description

cc...@google.com

created issue #1

May 6, 2024 10:04PM

In tweaking proguard rules in androidx microbenchmarks, I noticed that some of our generated moshi code references to a values array are failing to resolve, and crashing at runtime:

> ./gradlew benchmark:benchmark-benchmark:installRelease && adb shell am instrument -w -r -e debug false -e newRunListenerMode true -e class 'androidx.benchmark.benchmark.TrivialJavaBenchmark' -e androidx.benchmark.output.enable true -e listener androidx.benchmark.junit4.InstrumentationResultsRunListener androidx.benchmark.benchmark.test/androidx.benchmark.junit4.AndroidBenchmarkRunner

Time: 9.563
There were 2 failures:
1) increment(androidx.benchmark.benchmark.TrivialJavaBenchmark)
java.lang.ExceptionInInitializerError
	at androidx.benchmark.junit4.BenchmarkRule$applyInternal$$inlined$Statement$1.evaluate(SourceFile:123)
	at androidx.test.rule.GrantPermissionRule$RequestPermissionStatement.evaluate(Unknown Source:11)
	at org.junit.rules.RunRules.evaluate(Unknown Source:2)
...
	at androidx.test.runner.AndroidJUnitRunner.onStart(SourceFile:134)
	at android.app.Instrumentation$InstrumentationThread.run(Instrumentation.java:2402)
Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.NoSuchMethodException: androidx.benchmark.json.BenchmarkData$TestResult$ProfilerOutput$Type.values []
	at java.lang.Enum.enumValues(Enum.java:315)
...
	at androidx.benchmark.ResultWriter.<clinit>(SourceFile:20)
	... 31 more
Caused by: java.lang.NoSuchMethodException: androidx.benchmark.json.BenchmarkData$TestResult$ProfilerOutput$Type.values []
	at java.lang.Class.getMethod(Class.java:2937)
	at java.lang.Class.getDeclaredMethod(Class.java:2914)
	at java.lang.Enum.enumValues(Enum.java:312)
	... 64 more

# also repros with
#    ./gradlew benchmark:benchmark-benchmark:cC -P android.testInstrumentationRunnerArguments.class=androidx.benchmark.benchmark.TrivialJavaBenchmark
# but above makes crash stack clearer

Repro AndroidX CL, which just enables R8 in a trivial sample benchmark, and tweaks proguard rules to get it (almost) running: https://android-review.git.corp.google.com/c/platform/frameworks/support/+/3073538

Comments

cc...@google.com <cc...@google.com> #2May 6, 2024 10:22PM

Project: platform/frameworks/support
Branch: androidx-master-dev

commit b90079595f33f58fece04026a97faa0d243acdb1
Author: Yuichi Araki <yaraki@google.com>
Date: Wed Sep 18 16:55:49 2019

Change the way to detect mismatch between POJO and query

This fixes cursor mismatch warnings with expandProjection.

Bug: 140759491
Test: QueryMethodProcessorTest
Change-Id: I7659002e5e0d1ef60fc1af2a625c0c36da0664d8

M room/compiler/src/main/kotlin/androidx/room/processor/QueryMethodProcessor.kt
M room/compiler/src/main/kotlin/androidx/room/solver/TypeAdapterStore.kt
M room/compiler/src/main/kotlin/androidx/room/solver/query/result/PojoRowAdapter.kt
M room/compiler/src/test/kotlin/androidx/room/processor/QueryMethodProcessorTest.kt
M room/compiler/src/test/kotlin/androidx/room/testing/TestProcessor.kt

https://android-review.googlesource.com/1123258

https://goto.google.com/android-sha1/b90079595f33f58fece04026a97faa0d243acdb1

ap...@google.com <ap...@google.com> #3May 6, 2024 10:53PM

The following changes were cherrypicked through Coastguard (

https://android-build.googleplex.com/coastguard/)
Release Track: (

https://android-build.googleplex.com/coastguard/dashboard/6093116828680192/#/cherrypickHistory/all)
Created: 2019-10-14 17:23:42.610596+00:00
Changes: aosp/1123258

ch...@google.com <ch...@google.com> #4May 7, 2024 07:34AM

Reassigned to ch...@google.com.

Project: platform/frameworks/support
Branch: androidx-master-dev

commit bdde5a1a970ddc9007b28de4aa29d60ffa588f08
Author: Yigit Boyar <yboyar@google.com>
Date: Thu Apr 16 16:47:05 2020

Re-factor how errors are dismissed when query is re-written

This CL changes how we handle errors/warnings if query is
re-written.
There was a bug in expandProjection where we would report warnings
for things that Room already fixes automatically (

b/140759491

).
The solution to that problem (I7659002e5e0d1ef60fc1af2a625c0c36da0664d8)
solved it by deferring validating of columns until after re-write
decision is made. Unfortunately, this required changing PojoRowAdapter
to have a dummy mapping until it is validating, make it hard to use
as it does have a non-null mapping which is not useful.

This CL partially reverts that change and instead rely on the log
deferring logic we have in Context. This way, we don't need to break
the stability of PojoRowAdapter while still having the ability to
drop warnings that room fixes. This will also play nicer when we
have different query re-writing options that can use more information
about the query results.

Bug: 153387066
Bug: 140759491
Test: existing tests pass
Change-Id: I2ec967c763d33d7a3ff02c1a13c6953b460d1e5f

M room/compiler/src/main/kotlin/androidx/room/log/RLog.kt
M room/compiler/src/main/kotlin/androidx/room/processor/QueryMethodProcessor.kt
M room/compiler/src/main/kotlin/androidx/room/solver/TypeAdapterStore.kt
M room/compiler/src/main/kotlin/androidx/room/solver/query/result/PojoRowAdapter.kt

https://android-review.googlesource.com/1288456

cc...@google.com <cc...@google.com> #5May 7, 2024 10:44PM

Confirm that adding proguard-android-optimize.txt or those rules directly works around the issue.

I was missing it since I generally try to avoid proguard-android-optimize.txt since it is too inclusive in some cases.

Why are standard rules for enums necessary?

ze...@google.com <ze...@google.com> #6May 8, 2024 04:44AM

The Java standard library has implemented various parts of the enum by use of reflection within the runtime, so maintaining that behavior has required these rules in both Proguard and R8.

cc...@google.com <cc...@google.com> #7May 9, 2024 04:58PM

Is it possible for R8 to figure out which enum classes are potentially fed to such stl methods? If so, and the stl behavior is consistent (and stl using values to implement class.enumConstants seems reasonable), it would be nice to avoid this necessary configuration (even if studio gives it to you by default in the very stale proguard-android-optimize list).

Either that, or could make enum value/valueOf minification opt-in.

ze...@google.com <ze...@google.com> #8May 13, 2024 06:12AM

Unfortunately, we have not been able to come up with a safe/sound analysis that can determine when the rules are not needed. Conversely, we have no way of safely keeping the enums that is less conservative than the rules. There are clients that do not have these rules as they manually ensure that they have no usages of enums that would break. Thus we can't make the rules part of the compiler and we can't safely determine when they are needed. We are not happy with that situation, but we currently have no better alternatives.

cc...@google.com <cc...@google.com> #9May 13, 2024 11:40PM

Fair enough, feel free to close as WAI. Understand that the cost to migrate the default is non-zero, with minimal benefit.

ch...@google.com <ch...@google.com> May 14, 2024 07:31AM

Status: Won't Fix (Intended Behavior)

pr...@google.com <pr...@google.com> #10May 14, 2024 05:22PM

The following release(s) address this bug.It is possible this bug has only been partially addressed:

androidx.benchmark:benchmark-junit4:1.3.0-alpha05