[libc++] Update the status for lwg-3120 #116772
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
|
Thank you for submitting a Pull Request (PR) to the LLVM Project! This PR will be automatically labeled and the relevant teams will be notified. If you wish to, you can add reviewers by using the "Reviewers" section on this page. If this is not working for you, it is probably because you do not have write permissions for the repository. In which case you can instead tag reviewers by name in a comment by using If you have received no comments on your PR for a week, you can request a review by "ping"ing the PR by adding a comment “Ping”. The common courtesy "ping" rate is once a week. Please remember that you are asking for valuable time from other developers. If you have further questions, they may be answered by the LLVM GitHub User Guide. You can also ask questions in a comment on this PR, on the LLVM Discord or on the forums. |
llvmbot
added
the
libc++
|
@llvm/pr-subscribers-libcxx Author: helianthus (love1angel) ChangesCurrent implementation already have struct __initial_descriptor which saves the initial state. This path update the lwg 3120 issue latest status. Close #104274 Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116772.diff 1 Files Affected:
diff --git a/libcxx/docs/Status/Cxx23Issues.csv b/libcxx/docs/Status/Cxx23Issues.csv
index 1215f21985eb94..95ecccbd505aab 100644
--- a/libcxx/docs/Status/Cxx23Issues.csv
+++ b/libcxx/docs/Status/Cxx23Issues.csv
@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@
"`LWG2731 <https://wg21.link/LWG2731>`__","Existence of ``lock_guard<MutexTypes...>::mutex_type`` typedef unclear","2020-11 (Virtual)","|Complete|","5",""
"`LWG2743 <https://wg21.link/LWG2743>`__","P0083R3 ``node_handle`` private members missing ""exposition only"" comment","2020-11 (Virtual)","|Nothing To Do|","",""
"`LWG2820 <https://wg21.link/LWG2820>`__","Clarify ``<cstdint>`` macros","2020-11 (Virtual)","|Nothing To Do|","",""
-"`LWG3120 <https://wg21.link/LWG3120>`__","Unclear behavior of ``monotonic_buffer_resource::release()``","2020-11 (Virtual)","","",""
+"`LWG3120 <https://wg21.link/LWG3120>`__","Unclear behavior of ``monotonic_buffer_resource::release()``","2020-11 (Virtual)","|Nothing To Do|","",""
"`LWG3170 <https://wg21.link/LWG3170>`__","``is_always_equal`` added to ``std::allocator`` makes the standard library treat derived types as always equal","2020-11 (Virtual)","|Complete|","18",""
"`LWG3036 <https://wg21.link/LWG3036>`__","``polymorphic_allocator::destroy`` is extraneous","2020-11 (Virtual)","|Nothing To Do|","","Reverted by P2875R4"
"`LWG3171 <https://wg21.link/LWG3171>`__","LWG2989 breaks ``directory_entry`` stream insertion","2020-11 (Virtual)","|Complete|","14",""
|
|
the two example provided in https://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/issue3120 is also tested. example 1 provided#include <memory_resource>
int main()
{
char buffer[100];
{
std::pmr::monotonic_buffer_resource mr(buffer, 100, std::pmr::null_memory_resource());
mr.release();
mr.allocate(60); // A
}
{
std::pmr::monotonic_buffer_resource mr(buffer, 100, std::pmr::null_memory_resource());
mr.allocate(60); // B
mr.release();
mr.allocate(60); // C
}
}below is the test result, A, B, C is succeess. example 2 providedstd::pmr::monotonic_buffer_resource mr(std::pmr::new_delete_resource());
for (int i=0; i < 100; ++i) {
mr.allocate(1); // D
mr.release();
}i tested it through this #include <memory_resource>
#include <print>
class MyPmr : public std::pmr::memory_resource {
public:
explicit MyPmr(std::pmr::memory_resource* upstream)
: m_upstream(upstream)
{
}
private:
void* do_allocate(size_t bytes, size_t align) override
{
std::println("allocate: {}, {}", bytes, align);
void* p = m_upstream->allocate(bytes, align);
return p;
}
void do_deallocate(void* p, size_t bytes, size_t align) override
{
std::println("deallocate: {}, {}, {}", p, bytes, align);
m_upstream->deallocate(p, bytes, align);
}
bool do_is_equal(memory_resource const& other) const noexcept override
{
return other.is_equal(*m_upstream);
}
private:
std::pmr::memory_resource* m_upstream;
};
int main()
{
MyPmr s { std::pmr::new_delete_resource() };
std::pmr::monotonic_buffer_resource mr { &s };
for (int i = 0; i < 100; ++i) {
mr.allocate(1); // D
mr.release();
}
}which output always means we don't increase the next buffer size. |
love1angel
force-pushed
the
peng/fix_lwg_3120
branch
from
9f81f28 to
2cd2342
Compare
frederick-vs-ja
approved these changes
Nov 19, 2024
|
Hi, @frederick-vs-ja, also, can you assign the lwg 3143 issue to me? I also working on this. thanks in advance |
Assigned. Also, I think we don't need to merge the I'm waiting for CI becoming all green... |
love1angel
force-pushed
the
peng/fix_lwg_3120
branch
from
b7855bb to
817a90e
Compare
Yes, I miss clicked on github ui, and now i have reset it to supposed to be. I'm new to this. sorry don't know merrge rule. |
frederick-vs-ja
approved these changes
Nov 19, 2024
ldionne
requested changes
Nov 28, 2024
yes, so i changed to draft. need to add test here. |
love1angel
force-pushed
the
peng/fix_lwg_3120
branch
6 times, most recently
from
6b4d394 to
f85e051
Compare
love1angel
force-pushed
the
peng/fix_lwg_3120
branch
2 times, most recently
from
1bdb206 to
f30ce1a
Compare
philnik777
reviewed
Feb 10, 2025
.../mem.res.monotonic.buffer/mem.res.monotonic.buffer.mem/release_reset_initial_status.pass.cpp
Show resolved
Hide resolved
.../mem.res.monotonic.buffer/mem.res.monotonic.buffer.mem/release_reset_initial_status.pass.cpp
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
.../mem.res.monotonic.buffer/mem.res.monotonic.buffer.mem/release_reset_initial_status.pass.cpp
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
love1angel
force-pushed
the
peng/fix_lwg_3120
branch
from
f30ce1a to
b3b9051
Compare
frederick-vs-ja
approved these changes
Feb 15, 2025
philnik777
reviewed
Feb 16, 2025
.../mem.res.monotonic.buffer/mem.res.monotonic.buffer.mem/release_reset_initial_status.pass.cpp
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Comment on lines
37
to
38
| // Given | ||
| // when init given a buffer, after release(), initial ptr will reset to it's initial state |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry, I don't understand what this comment is trying to tell me. Could you formulate this in full sentences?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think you've addressed this.
.../mem.res.monotonic.buffer/mem.res.monotonic.buffer.mem/release_reset_initial_status.pass.cpp
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
.../mem.res.monotonic.buffer/mem.res.monotonic.buffer.mem/release_reset_initial_status.pass.cpp
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
.../mem.res.monotonic.buffer/mem.res.monotonic.buffer.mem/release_reset_initial_status.pass.cpp
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
.../mem.res.monotonic.buffer/mem.res.monotonic.buffer.mem/release_reset_initial_status.pass.cpp
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
love1angel
force-pushed
the
peng/fix_lwg_3120
branch
from
b3b9051 to
0a5b101
Compare
love1angel
force-pushed
the
peng/fix_lwg_3120
branch
2 times, most recently
from
666753a to
2c59de5
Compare
love1angel
commented
Feb 18, 2025
.../mem.res.monotonic.buffer/mem.res.monotonic.buffer.mem/release_reset_initial_status.pass.cpp
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
love1angel
force-pushed
the
peng/fix_lwg_3120
branch
from
2c59de5 to
1a78af3
Compare
Current implementation already have struct __initial_descriptor which saves the initial state. When release() called, we will reset ptr __initial_descriptor.__cur_, next buffer size never changed. This patch update the lwg 3120 issue latest status and add test.
love1angel
force-pushed
the
peng/fix_lwg_3120
branch
from
1a78af3 to
8593368
Compare
philnik777
approved these changes
Feb 19, 2025
ldionne
approved these changes
Mar 26, 2025
ldionne
reviewed
Mar 26, 2025
.../mem.res.monotonic.buffer/mem.res.monotonic.buffer.mem/release_reset_initial_status.pass.cpp
Show resolved
Hide resolved
…ffer/mem.res.monotonic.buffer.mem/release_reset_initial_status.pass.cpp
|
@love1angel Congratulations on having your first Pull Request (PR) merged into the LLVM Project! Your changes will be combined with recent changes from other authors, then tested by our build bots. If there is a problem with a build, you may receive a report in an email or a comment on this PR. Please check whether problems have been caused by your change specifically, as the builds can include changes from many authors. It is not uncommon for your change to be included in a build that fails due to someone else's changes, or infrastructure issues. How to do this, and the rest of the post-merge process, is covered in detail here. If your change does cause a problem, it may be reverted, or you can revert it yourself. This is a normal part of LLVM development. You can fix your changes and open a new PR to merge them again. If you don't get any reports, no action is required from you. Your changes are working as expected, well done! |
|
LLVM Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder Full details are available at: https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/51/builds/13252 Here is the relevant piece of the build log for the reference |
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.
Current implementation already have struct __initial_descriptor which saves the initial state.
When release() called, we will reset ptr __initial_descriptor._cur.
This patch update the lwg 3120 issue latest status.
Close #104274