[compiler-v2] Adding full compiler pipeline to many test configs #12831
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
vineethk
commented
Apr 9, 2024
|
|
||
|
|
||
| Diagnostics: | ||
| bug: struct not defined |
vineethk
commented
Apr 9, 2024
| @@ -23,3 +23,11 @@ module <SELF>_0 { | |||
| } | |||
| } | |||
| } // end <SELF>_0 | |||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
| Diagnostics: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The various diagnostics added here (in this folder) should be safe and meaningful (that simplifier elimination does not incorrectly remove these errors from being reported).
vineethk
commented
Apr 9, 2024
| @@ -176,12 +176,9 @@ const TEST_CONFIGS: Lazy<BTreeMap<&str, TestConfig>> = Lazy::new(|| { | |||
| exp_suffix: None, | |||
| options: opts | |||
| .clone() | |||
| .set_experiment(Experiment::AST_SIMPLIFY_FULL, true) | |||
| // TODO: this check should not need to be turned off, but some | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It was not clear what about the tests were needed to be fixed - they seemed fine to me (enabling it allows various errors to be reported in the stackless bytecode checker, which seems like useful tests).
vineethk
commented
Apr 9, 2024
| @@ -433,10 +432,9 @@ const TEST_CONFIGS: Lazy<BTreeMap<&str, TestConfig>> = Lazy::new(|| { | |||
| include: vec!["/unreachable-code-remover/"], | |||
| exclude: vec![], | |||
| exp_suffix: None, | |||
| options: opts | |||
| .clone() | |||
| .set_experiment(Experiment::ABILITY_CHECK, false), | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Again, was not clear why we would disable this, and it does not affect the test output in any meaningful way.
vineethk
commented
Apr 9, 2024
| @@ -13,25 +13,10 @@ fun m::test() { | |||
| [variant baseline] | |||
| fun m::test() { | |||
| var $t0: u64 | |||
| # live vars: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
All these changes should not be relevant to the unreachable code remover.
brmataptos
approved these changes
Apr 9, 2024
rahxephon89
approved these changes
Apr 10, 2024
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
✅ Forge suite
|
✅ Forge suite
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
This PR adds full compiler pipeline to many test configs. This allows double checking that bytecode verification does not fail for any code that we successfully compile in v2 without reporting blocking errors.
As a result, we found this bug: #12820.
Note that adding full compiler pipeline to "bytecode-gen" is being done here - #12818, so not done in this PR.
Closes #12830.
Type of Change
Which Components or Systems Does This Change Impact?
How Has This Been Tested?
Existing tests, which have all been updated with new baselines.
Key Areas to Review
Output of the baseline files: I have tried to explain why the changes (other than "bytecode verification succeeded" messages) are okay once per directory, using github comments.