Tarantool development patches archive
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sergos via Tarantool-patches <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>
To: Sergey Kaplun <skaplun@tarantool.org>
Cc: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH luajit] LJ_GC64: Fix IR_VARG offset for fixed number of results.
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2022 14:54:30 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8B86F311-0882-4D94-9FD4-EB93EB11393C@tarantool.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220713095349.31718-1-skaplun@tarantool.org>

Hi!

Thanks for the patch, some updates to the test.

Regards,
Sergos

> On 13 Jul 2022, at 12:53, Sergey Kaplun <skaplun@tarantool.org> wrote:
> 
> From: Mike Pall <mike>
> 
> Reported by George Vaintrub. Fixed by Sergey Kaplun.
> 
> (cherry picked from commit 6bda30d8c745b3963ba870221b9be6acdffed9b1)
> 
> This bug occurs when recording `BC_VARG` with the following conditions:
> 1) varargs undefined on trace.
Later in the test you just mention its size should be bigger than results’ one?

> 2) known fixed number of results.
> 
> For this case the vararg slots loads via `IR_VLOAD` by offset from
                                are loaded by       using an

> vararg base. In GC64 mode this offset was miscounting due to missing
the             the                      is miscounted

> `LJ_FR2` correction in the base TRef calculation. As the result the
> wrong (+1) vararg slot is used.
> 
> This patch adds the missing the aforementioned `LJ_FR2` correction.
                              xxx
> 
> Sergey Kaplun:
> * added the description and the test for the problem
> 
> Resolves tarantool/tarantool#7172
> Part of tarantool/tarantool#7230
> ---
> 
> Branch: https://github.com/tarantool/luajit/tree/skaplun/lj-864-varg-rec-base-offset-full-ci
> Issues:
> * https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/issues/7172
> * https://github.com/LuaJIT/LuaJIT/issues/864
> 
> src/lj_record.c                               |  2 +-
> .../lj-864-varg-rec-base-offset.test.lua      | 25 +++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> create mode 100644 test/tarantool-tests/lj-864-varg-rec-base-offset.test.lua
> 
> diff --git a/src/lj_record.c b/src/lj_record.c
> index a11f3712..9e2e1d9e 100644
> --- a/src/lj_record.c
> +++ b/src/lj_record.c
> @@ -1794,7 +1794,7 @@ static void rec_varg(jit_State *J, BCReg dst, ptrdiff_t nresults)
> 	  emitir(IRTGI(IR_EQ), fr,
> 		 lj_ir_kint(J, (int32_t)frame_ftsz(J->L->base-1)));
> 	vbase = emitir(IRT(IR_SUB, IRT_IGC), REF_BASE, fr);
> -	vbase = emitir(IRT(IR_ADD, IRT_PGC), vbase, lj_ir_kint(J, frofs-8));
> +	vbase = emitir(IRT(IR_ADD, IRT_PGC), vbase, lj_ir_kint(J, frofs-8*(1+LJ_FR2)));
                                                                         Wherearemyspaces?
                                                                      (nevermind, just a moan)

> 	for (i = 0; i < nload; i++) {
> 	  IRType t = itype2irt(&J->L->base[i-1-LJ_FR2-nvararg]);
> 	  TRef aref = emitir(IRT(IR_AREF, IRT_PGC),
> diff --git a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-864-varg-rec-base-offset.test.lua b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-864-varg-rec-base-offset.test.lua
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000..ca30f92f
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-864-varg-rec-base-offset.test.lua
> @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
> +local tap = require('tap')
> +
> +-- Test file to demonstrate LuaJIT misbehaviour during recording
> +-- BC_VARG with nvarargs >= nresults in GC64 mode.
In the message you say it should be unknown. What’s the dirty truth is?

> +-- See also https://github.com/LuaJIT/LuaJIT/issues/864,
> +-- https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/issues/7172.
> +local test = tap.test('lj-864-varg-rec-base-offset')
> +test:plan(1)
> +
> +jit.opt.start('hotloop=1')
> +
> +local MAGIC = 42
Should be enough to test against the first argument, no MAGIC :)

> +local function test_rec_varg(...)
> +  local slot1
> +  for _ = 1, 3 do
> +    slot1 = ...
> +  end
++  args = {...}
+-  return slot1 == args[1]
> +end
> +
> +-- Test case for nvarargs >= nresults. Equality is not suitable
> +-- due to failing assertion guard for type of loaded vararg slot.
> +test:ok(test_rec_varg(MAGIC, 0), 'correct BC_VARG recording')
> +
> +os.exit(test:check() and 0 or 1)
> -- 
> 2.34.1
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2022-07-14 11:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-07-13  9:53 Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches
2022-07-14 11:54 ` sergos via Tarantool-patches [this message]
2022-07-15 14:44   ` Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches
2022-07-15 15:03     ` sergos via Tarantool-patches
2022-07-19  0:14 ` Igor Munkin via Tarantool-patches
2022-08-10 14:32 ` Igor Munkin via Tarantool-patches

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=8B86F311-0882-4D94-9FD4-EB93EB11393C@tarantool.org \
    --to=tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org \
    --cc=sergos@tarantool.org \
    --cc=skaplun@tarantool.org \
    --subject='Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH luajit] LJ_GC64: Fix IR_VARG offset for fixed number of results.' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox