| IRC logs at
Set by AlexDaniel on 12 June 2018.
00:01 sena_kun joined 00:03 Altai-man_ left
timotimo in that case, i wonder if compiling what deopt has to do to ops that can then be jitted rather than interpreted would be doable without making a big mess out of things 00:33
02:01 Altai-man_ joined 02:03 sena_kun left 04:02 sena_kun joined 04:03 Altai-man_ left 04:53 sena_kun left 04:54 sena_kun joined 06:01 Altai-man_ joined 06:04 sena_kun left
nwc10 good *, #moarvm 06:55
06:57 Kaeipi left 07:00 Kaiepi joined 07:47 zakharyas joined 08:02 sena_kun joined 08:03 Altai-man_ left 10:01 Altai-man_ joined 10:03 sena_kun left 11:35 zakharyas left 11:44 patrickb joined 12:01 sena_kun joined 12:03 Altai-man_ left 12:42 zakharyas joined 12:45 Kaiepi left 12:48 Kaiepi joined 13:02 Kaeipi joined 13:06 Kaiepi left 13:13 Kaeipi left
jnthn Ah....the revenge of lazy deopt 13:46
So at the point we find an exception handler...the frame we find it in may still be specialized
But if there's lazy deopt, then by the time we actually reach it, then it won't be any more 13:47
And ouch ouch ouch, it ain't just JIT 13:49
It'll also have the specialized bytecode address wrong too 13:50
Well, have the specialized address, not the deopt'd one
13:58 lucasb joined 14:01 Altai-man_ joined 14:03 sena_kun left
nine We serialize method caches? That's a bit surprising... 14:49
jnthn Yes, though they're going away with new-disp 14:54
14:55 Kaiepi joined
jnthn *sigh* I really don't get why the clever fix I thought of for the unwind issue causes all kinds of madness... 14:55
nine the usual small detail throwing a wrench... 14:58
15:27 Kaiepi left
Geth MoarVM/new-disp: 4579f66547 | (Jonathan Worthington)++ | src/core/frame.c
Have frame unwind use the return mechanism

Since we perform lazy deopt on returning into a frame, we can't rely on the JIT or bytecode address we discovered when locating an exception handler still being meaningful after that has happened. So instead, set the return address in the caller to be those things, and then rely on the usual frame removal process to do the right thing, including in the lazy deopt case.
jnthn Well, that's one SEGV down
grmbl, I still have failures when running `make test` that I can't reproduce when I run the things alone 15:44
[Coke] does the error in make test go away with TEST_JOBS=1 ? 15:46
jnthn Didn't try that yet
MasterDuke jnthn: fwiw, i get those on master. i.e., random fails in spectests, that i can't repro even when running that file in a loop for a lot of iterations. and it seems completely random which test file 15:48
jnthn This is just test, not spectest 15:49
15:50 Kaiepi joined
MasterDuke ah. don't remember it happening in test on master 15:50
jnthn Yeah, this is certainly a regression of sorts 15:51
Despite the mass of spectest fails (most 'cus I didn't wire up multi dispatch to the new dispatcher yet, it seems), I only see two segfaults 15:54
The current one is...because we have no caller...wat
nwc10 ASAN makes no comment on the NQP test suite 15:55
jnthn I observe that to be stable also 15:56
Is it happy with the Rakudo build?
Hm, this one is a real curiosity 15:58
16:01 sena_kun joined
nwc10 jnthn: it's working on that 16:03
16:03 Altai-man_ left 16:34 Kaiepi left
nwc10 jnthn: build is OK, many rakduo tests fail 16:36
16:36 zakharyas1 joined 16:38 zakharyas left
nwc10 tried one: Use of Nil in string context 16:40
jnthn How many is many? 16:43
nwc10 54 i think 16:44
jnthn Oh, tests, not test files 16:45
nwc10 no, 54 test files
out of 108
er, at least
jnthn OK, I see a single digit number 16:46
nwc10 I realise now that tmux can get keen and skip output
I have spesh
and all the pain enabled in the environment
jnthn Me too, though only MVM_SPESH_BLOCKING=1
nwc10 oh wait, am I supposed to update NQP?
jnthn If you don't have c0d4f2f289 then you'll probably have a bad time 16:47
Or at least, a less good one 16:48
nwc10 no, I think I had that
jnthn *sigh* this is so odd, it's somehow ending up in the same callframe after a return, rather than going back a frame... 16:59
Well, tomorrow
17:19 MasterDuke left 17:54 zakharyas1 left 18:01 Altai-man_ joined 18:03 sena_kun left 19:45 zakharyas joined 20:01 sena_kun joined 20:03 Altai-man_ left
timotimo tbh sounds like maybe rr + watchpoints could give valuable insight here 20:16
20:27 zakharyas left
nwc10 jnthn: in src/gc/roots.c, shouln't the code that iterates over tc->instance->sc_weakhash hold the tc->instance->mutex_sc_registry while doing this? 20:28
timotimo perhaps because it's GC, and all threads are supposed to be In It Together™, you don't need to?
nwc10 yes, that might be the answer 20:29
timotimo if only one thread is responsible for marking the weakhash, that ought to be fine
i do believe our marking and sweeping is in consecutive stages, i.e. every thread syncs up before all of them go to the second phase?
actually i'm basing this on ... nothing whatsoever
also, i wonder if it'd be interesting to store what percentage of time is spent in mark vs sweep in the profiler 20:30
nwc10 I don't know enough. Nothing you have said contracts my undestanding
timotimo that's a good way to say that :D :D
nwc10 but I was thinking something like your " i do believe our marking and sweeping " ...
and thinking - but hey, can't one thread be doign the marking, including that hash, whilst some other thread decides to mutate it.
timotimo btw i just had a thought 20:33
then i forgot it again
but i'm at least slightly certain it was a good thought
jnthn nwc10: I don't think so 'cus the GC is "stop the world"? 20:36
nwc10 OK. I didn't know what got stopped when.
I hope that I didh't wake you up :-) 20:37
jnthn No, have been cooking/eating :) 20:39
timotimo hey jnthn are all commits needed to see the "return to the same callframe" issue already pushed? if so, which test file is it?
jnthn Yes, they are, but unfortunately I forget the test file :/ 20:41
(I'm on my home machine now, it's on my office machine)
But basically run make spectest with MVM_SPESH_BLOCKING=1 and I only saw 2 SEGVs and it's one of them
timotimo does the crash look spectacular enough that i may be able to tell relatively quickly?
ah, good
jnthn It's one about recursion and native arrays, iirc 20:42
An integration test
timotimo jnthn: were you ever interested in timing mark vs sweep on a per-thread basis for the profiler? 20:44
jnthn I don't think so... :)
timotimo though i think if you have telemeh active you can see that 20:45
i totally need to write a telemeh-to-log-timeline translator so i actually have something to look at the output with
jnthn I ain't really done much with the GC in a long time, because I'm not often seeing it be The Bottleneck
timotimo or someone could put tracy into moarvm and replace telemeh with it
jnthn (I'm sure there are cases where it can be)
timotimo back when marking had to walk the entirety of the profile data tree, it could take rather A Time 20:46
i assume to get there i'd turn off spesh during core setting compilation? 20:49
and maybe all of rakudo compilation actually
just a little regret from not really having worked on the dispatcher program to spesh bytecode writer 20:53
Stage parse : 202.543 20:56
lizmat meow! 20:59
timotimo "t/spec/integration/deep-recursion-initing-native-array.t" that sounds good 21:19
slightly amused that this code results in two different specializations of init-array; one where the first argument is a scalar, the other where the second argument is a scalar 21:39
because on each branch it has the - 1 on a different argument
ah, bytecodedump is very unhappy with sp_dispatch_* having .s instead of .d 21:56
22:01 Altai-man_ joined 22:03 sena_kun left 22:12 nebuchadnezzar left
Geth MoarVM/new-disp: cc8634af49 | (Timo Paulssen)++ | src/core/bytecodedump.c
teach bytecodedump about sp_dispatch_* ops

will really want to factor this out ...
timotimo now is cooking and eating time, but having this fixed will surely help someone at some point
(also throws out debug output from bytecode dump)
this is perhaps not important, but somehow all comments that optimize_disp writes to the spesh graph have order 0, even though it's supposed to be using a counter on the spesh graph that gets incremented every time 22:19
i'm finding myself just looking at disp stuff in general rather than hunting the segfault 22:24
i'm not sure if this is relevant, but i see the sp_dispatch_o of infix:<+> have an annotation "logged: bytecode offset 182" but in the facts i see that at offset 184 it has "505 x spesh plugin guard index 0" 22:30
("spesh" just because it's re-using the same kind of entry for spesh guard hits and dispatch guard outcomes)
22:48 lucasb left
timotimo # [002] Deemed polymorphic 23:02
sp_dispatch_o r8(2), lits(raku-rv-typecheck), callsite(0x12b1240, 2 arg, 2 pos, nonflattening, interned), sslot(3), litui32(1), r6(3), r5(9)
when removing 2 from the bytecode address in interp.c; which makes sense, since reading the opcode advances the cur_op by 2 already, right? 23:05
jnthn Yes 23:06
timotimo want me to push that? 23:07
of course, apart from outputting whether it has never been dispatched or is deemed poly- or monomorphic it's not doing anything so far 23:11
23:35 nebuchadnezzar joined 23:47 patrickb left