1. 10 6月, 2020 1 次提交
    • A
      Revert "Combine sweeping and moving" · 62ce8f96
      Aaron Patterson 提交于
      This reverts commit 02b216e5.
      This reverts commit 9b8825b6.
      
      I found that combining sweep and move is not safe.  I don't think that
      we can do compaction concurrently with _anything_ unless there is a read
      barrier installed.
      
      Here is a simple example.  A class object is freed, and during it's free
      step, it tries to remove itself from its parent's subclass list.
      However, during the sweep step, the parent class was moved and the
      "currently being freed" class didn't have references updated yet.  So we
      get a segv like this:
      
      ```
      (lldb) bt
      * thread #1, name = 'ruby', stop reason = signal SIGSEGV
        * frame #0: 0x0000560763e344cb ruby`rb_st_lookup at st.c:320:43
          frame #1: 0x0000560763e344cb ruby`rb_st_lookup(tab=0x2f7469672f6e6f72, key=3809, value=0x0000560765bf2270) at st.c:1010
          frame #2: 0x0000560763e8f16a ruby`rb_search_class_path at variable.c:99:9
          frame #3: 0x0000560763e8f141 ruby`rb_search_class_path at variable.c:145
          frame #4: 0x0000560763e8f141 ruby`rb_search_class_path(klass=94589785585880) at variable.c:191
          frame #5: 0x0000560763ec744e ruby`rb_vm_bugreport at vm_dump.c:996:17
          frame #6: 0x0000560763f5b958 ruby`rb_bug_for_fatal_signal at error.c:675:5
          frame #7: 0x0000560763e27dad ruby`sigsegv(sig=<unavailable>, info=<unavailable>, ctx=<unavailable>) at signal.c:955:5
          frame #8: 0x00007f8b891d33c0 libpthread.so.0`___lldb_unnamed_symbol1$$libpthread.so.0 + 1
          frame #9: 0x0000560763efa8bb ruby`rb_class_remove_from_super_subclasses(klass=94589790314280) at class.c:93:56
          frame #10: 0x0000560763d10cb7 ruby`gc_sweep_step at gc.c:2674:2
          frame #11: 0x0000560763d1187b ruby`gc_sweep at gc.c:4540:2
          frame #12: 0x0000560763d101f0 ruby`gc_start at gc.c:6797:6
          frame #13: 0x0000560763d15153 ruby`rb_gc_compact at gc.c:7479:12
          frame #14: 0x0000560763eb4eb8 ruby`vm_exec_core at vm_insnhelper.c:5183:13
          frame #15: 0x0000560763ea9bae ruby`rb_vm_exec at vm.c:1953:22
          frame #16: 0x0000560763eac08d ruby`rb_yield at vm.c:1132:9
          frame #17: 0x0000560763edb4f2 ruby`rb_ary_collect at array.c:3186:9
          frame #18: 0x0000560763e9ee15 ruby`vm_call_cfunc_with_frame at vm_insnhelper.c:2575:12
          frame #19: 0x0000560763eb2e66 ruby`vm_exec_core at vm_insnhelper.c:4177:11
          frame #20: 0x0000560763ea9bae ruby`rb_vm_exec at vm.c:1953:22
          frame #21: 0x0000560763eac08d ruby`rb_yield at vm.c:1132:9
          frame #22: 0x0000560763edb4f2 ruby`rb_ary_collect at array.c:3186:9
          frame #23: 0x0000560763e9ee15 ruby`vm_call_cfunc_with_frame at vm_insnhelper.c:2575:12
          frame #24: 0x0000560763eb2e66 ruby`vm_exec_core at vm_insnhelper.c:4177:11
          frame #25: 0x0000560763ea9bae ruby`rb_vm_exec at vm.c:1953:22
          frame #26: 0x0000560763ceee01 ruby`rb_ec_exec_node(ec=0x0000560765afa530, n=0x0000560765b088e0) at eval.c:296:2
          frame #27: 0x0000560763cf3b7b ruby`ruby_run_node(n=0x0000560765b088e0) at eval.c:354:12
          frame #28: 0x0000560763cee4a3 ruby`main(argc=<unavailable>, argv=<unavailable>) at main.c:50:9
          frame #29: 0x00007f8b88e560b3 libc.so.6`__libc_start_main + 243
          frame #30: 0x0000560763cee4ee ruby`_start + 46
      (lldb) f 9
      frame #9: 0x0000560763efa8bb ruby`rb_class_remove_from_super_subclasses(klass=94589790314280) at class.c:93:56
         90
         91  		*RCLASS_EXT(klass)->parent_subclasses = entry->next;
         92  		if (entry->next) {
      -> 93  		    RCLASS_EXT(entry->next->klass)->parent_subclasses = RCLASS_EXT(klass)->parent_subclasses;
         94  		}
         95  		xfree(entry);
         96  	    }
      (lldb) command script import -r misc/lldb_cruby.py
      lldb scripts for ruby has been installed.
      (lldb) rp entry->next->klass
      (struct RMoved) $1 = (flags = 30, destination = 94589792806680, next = 94589784369160)
      (lldb)
      ```
      62ce8f96
  2. 30 5月, 2020 1 次提交
  3. 25 5月, 2020 1 次提交
  4. 21 4月, 2020 1 次提交
  5. 17 4月, 2020 2 次提交
  6. 15 4月, 2020 1 次提交
  7. 12 4月, 2020 1 次提交
  8. 11 4月, 2020 1 次提交
  9. 10 4月, 2020 4 次提交
  10. 08 4月, 2020 1 次提交
  11. 18 3月, 2020 2 次提交
    • K
      Added link to the ticket [ci skip] · afd23ed0
      Kazuhiro NISHIYAMA 提交于
      afd23ed0
    • J
      Reduce allocations for keyword argument hashes · d2c41b1b
      Jeremy Evans 提交于
      Previously, passing a keyword splat to a method always allocated
      a hash on the caller side, and accepting arbitrary keywords in
      a method allocated a separate hash on the callee side.  Passing
      explicit keywords to a method that accepted a keyword splat
      did not allocate a hash on the caller side, but resulted in two
      hashes allocated on the callee side.
      
      This commit makes passing a single keyword splat to a method not
      allocate a hash on the caller side.  Passing multiple keyword
      splats or a mix of explicit keywords and a keyword splat still
      generates a hash on the caller side.  On the callee side,
      if arbitrary keywords are not accepted, it does not allocate a
      hash.  If arbitrary keywords are accepted, it will allocate a
      hash, but this commit uses a callinfo flag to indicate whether
      the caller already allocated a hash, and if so, the callee can
      use the passed hash without duplicating it.  So this commit
      should make it so that a maximum of a single hash is allocated
      during method calls.
      
      To set the callinfo flag appropriately, method call argument
      compilation checks if only a single keyword splat is given.
      If only one keyword splat is given, the VM_CALL_KW_SPLAT_MUT
      callinfo flag is not set, since in that case the keyword
      splat is passed directly and not mutable.  If more than one
      splat is used, a new hash needs to be generated on the caller
      side, and in that case the callinfo flag is set, indicating
      the keyword splat is mutable by the callee.
      
      In compile_hash, used for both hash and keyword argument
      compilation, if compiling keyword arguments and only a
      single keyword splat is used, pass the argument directly.
      
      On the caller side, in vm_args.c, the callinfo flag needs to
      be recognized and handled.  Because the keyword splat
      argument may not be a hash, it needs to be converted to a
      hash first if not.  Then, unless the callinfo flag is set,
      the hash needs to be duplicated.  The temporary copy of the
      callinfo flag, kw_flag, is updated if a hash was duplicated,
      to prevent the need to duplicate it again.  If we are
      converting to a hash or duplicating a hash, we need to update
      the argument array, which can including duplicating the
      positional splat array if one was passed.  CALLER_SETUP_ARG
      and a couple other places needs to be modified to handle
      similar issues for other types of calls.
      
      This includes fairly comprehensive tests for different ways
      keywords are handled internally, checking that you get equal
      results but that keyword splats on the caller side result in
      distinct objects for keyword rest parameters.
      
      Included are benchmarks for keyword argument calls.
      Brief results when compiled without optimization:
      
        def kw(a: 1) a end
        def kws(**kw) kw end
        h = {a: 1}
      
        kw(a: 1)       # about same
        kw(**h)        # 2.37x faster
        kws(a: 1)      # 1.30x faster
        kws(**h)       # 2.19x faster
        kw(a: 1, **h)  # 1.03x slower
        kw(**h, **h)   # about same
        kws(a: 1, **h) # 1.16x faster
        kws(**h, **h)  # 1.14x faster
      d2c41b1b
  12. 16 3月, 2020 1 次提交
    • Y
      hash.c: Do not use the fast path (rb_yield_values) for lambda blocks · 47141797
      Yusuke Endoh 提交于
      As a semantics, Hash#each yields a 2-element array (pairs of keys and
      values).  So, `{ a: 1 }.each(&->(k, v) { })` should raise an exception
      due to lambda's arity check.
      However, the optimization that avoids Array allocation by using
      rb_yield_values for blocks whose arity is more than 1 (introduced at
      b9d29603 and some commits), seemed to
      overlook the lambda case, and wrongly allowed the code above to work.
      
      This change experimentally attempts to make it strict; now the code
      above raises an ArgumentError.  This is an incompatible change; if the
      compatibility issue is bigger than our expectation, it may be reverted
      (until Ruby 3.0 release).
      
      [Bug #12706]
      47141797
  13. 11 3月, 2020 2 次提交
  14. 10 3月, 2020 2 次提交
  15. 09 3月, 2020 1 次提交
  16. 03 3月, 2020 1 次提交
  17. 29 2月, 2020 3 次提交
  18. 19 2月, 2020 1 次提交
  19. 17 2月, 2020 4 次提交
  20. 12 2月, 2020 1 次提交
  21. 24 1月, 2020 1 次提交
  22. 23 1月, 2020 1 次提交
  23. 19 1月, 2020 2 次提交
  24. 18 1月, 2020 3 次提交
  25. 16 1月, 2020 1 次提交