Use function signatures for SILDeclRefs in witness_tables, vtables and witness_method instructions #4048

swiftix · 2016-08-05T18:52:56Z

What's in this pull request?

Resolved bug number: (SR-)

Before merging this pull request to apple/swift repository:

Test pull request on Swift continuous integration.

Triggering Swift CI

The swift-ci is triggered by writing a comment on this PR addressed to the GitHub user @swift-ci. Different tests will run depending on the specific comment that you use. The currently available comments are:

Smoke Testing

Platform	Comment
All supported platforms	@swift-ci Please smoke test
All supported platforms	@swift-ci Please smoke test and merge
OS X platform	@swift-ci Please smoke test OS X platform
Linux platform	@swift-ci Please smoke test Linux platform

A smoke test on macOS does the following:

Builds the compiler incrementally.
Builds the standard library only for macOS. Simulator standard libraries and
device standard libraries are not built.
lldb is not built.
The test and validation-test targets are run only for macOS. The optimized
version of these tests are not run.

A smoke test on Linux does the following:

Builds the compiler incrementally.
Builds the standard library incrementally.
lldb is built incrementally.
The swift test and validation-test targets are run. The optimized version of these
tests are not run.
lldb is tested.

Validation Testing

Platform	Comment
All supported platforms	@swift-ci Please test
All supported platforms	@swift-ci Please test and merge
OS X platform	@swift-ci Please test OS X platform
OS X platform	@swift-ci Please benchmark
Linux platform	@swift-ci Please test Linux platform

Lint Testing

Language	Comment
Python	@swift-ci Please Python lint

Note: Only members of the Apple organization can trigger swift-ci.

Textual SIL was sometimes ambiguous when SILDeclRefs were used, because the textual representation of SILDeclRefs was the same for functions that have the same name, but different signatures.

This patch fixes this problem.

swiftix · 2016-08-05T18:53:40Z

@swift-ci Please smoke test

swiftix · 2016-08-05T18:54:28Z

@jckarter Joe, do you mind having a quick look? This is nothing urgent. So, only if you have a couple of spare minutes.

gottesmm · 2016-08-05T18:57:36Z

@swiftix Is this doing the demangled thing?

swiftix · 2016-08-05T19:00:01Z

@gottesmm No, it adds signatures. So, no cryptic mangled names.

gottesmm · 2016-08-05T19:07:03Z

= D

swiftix · 2016-08-05T20:04:47Z

@swift-ci Please test

swiftix · 2016-08-05T22:32:09Z

@swift-ci Please test

jckarter · 2016-08-05T22:45:10Z

Looks good, thanks @swiftix .

shahmishal · 2016-08-06T00:39:58Z

@swift-ci please test linux

tkremenek · 2016-08-06T06:26:26Z

Linux failure looks genuine.

swiftix · 2016-08-06T19:27:49Z

@swift-ci Please smoke test Linux

swiftix · 2016-08-07T02:29:58Z

There seems to be a problem with parsing SILDeclRefs which use a Self type. I filed a rdar://27735857 about it.

@jckarter @slavapestov Can one of you have a look at this radar when you have a spare minute?

swiftix · 2016-08-09T22:49:48Z

This PR is dependent on the #4126.

slavapestov · 2016-08-09T23:05:09Z

@swiftix The DynamicSelf fix is now merged in master. You don't need it for 3.0 branch do you?

swiftix · 2016-08-10T04:33:19Z

@slavapestov No, I don't need to for 3.0.

swiftix · 2016-08-10T04:35:51Z

@swift-ci Please test

swiftix · 2016-08-10T05:02:28Z

@swift-ci Please smoke test

swiftix · 2016-08-10T05:58:43Z

@swift-ci Please test

swiftix · 2016-08-10T15:12:28Z

@swift-ci Please test Linux

swiftix · 2016-08-10T15:21:01Z

@swift-ci Please test Linux

swiftix · 2016-08-10T16:55:03Z

@swift-ci Please test Linux

swiftix · 2016-08-10T18:28:03Z

@swift-ci Please test Linux

swiftix · 2016-08-13T00:28:12Z

@akyrtzi I'm blocked by rdar://27794707 now ;-) If you could fix it, it would be nice. But it is not urgent. So, no hurry.

…IL printing Worksaround the issue that type objects do not preserve info to print requirements accurately. rdar://27794707

tkremenek · 2016-08-16T23:16:42Z

@swiftix rdar://27794707 is fixed

slavapestov · 2017-01-10T07:05:20Z

@swiftix Just saying, it would be awesome if you ever get around to finishing this off :-)

swiftix · 2017-01-25T19:10:04Z

@swift-ci Please smoke test

swiftix · 2017-01-25T20:39:57Z

@swift-ci Please smoke test

shahmishal · 2017-01-25T20:56:59Z

FYI - CI is down for upgrade.

swiftix · 2017-01-26T01:06:04Z

@jckarter Do you mind taking a quick look at it? Does it seem reasonable?

swiftix · 2017-01-26T16:06:07Z

@jckarter I'd like to merge it today. Any objections?

jckarter · 2017-01-26T19:38:39Z

test/SILGen/dynamic_lookup.swift

@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ func direct_to_static_method(_ obj: AnyObject) {
  // CHECK-NEXT: [[OBJCOPY:%[0-9]+]] = load_borrow [[PBOBJ]] : $*AnyObject
  // CHECK-NEXT: [[OBJMETA:%[0-9]+]] = existential_metatype $@thick AnyObject.Type, [[OBJCOPY]] : $AnyObject
  // CHECK-NEXT: [[OPENMETA:%[0-9]+]] = open_existential_metatype [[OBJMETA]] : $@thick AnyObject.Type to $@thick (@opened([[UUID:".*"]]) AnyObject).Type
-  // CHECK-NEXT: [[METHOD:%[0-9]+]] = dynamic_method [volatile] [[OPENMETA]] : $@thick (@opened([[UUID]]) AnyObject).Type, #X.staticF!1.foreign : (X.Type) -> () -> (), $@convention(objc_method) (@thick (@opened([[UUID]]) AnyObject).Type) -> ()
+  // CHECK-NEXT: [[METHOD:%[0-9]+]] = dynamic_method [volatile] [[OPENMETA]] : $@thick (@opened([[UUID]]) AnyObject).Type, #X.staticF!1.foreign : (X.Type) -> () -> () , $@convention(objc_method) (@thick (@opened([[UUID]]) AnyObject).Type) -> ()


Extra space seems to be printed here

jckarter · 2017-01-26T19:44:07Z

It'd be nice to have a test with a .sil file that exercises the new syntax. Looks reasonable otherwise.

gottesmm · 2017-01-26T20:22:32Z

@jckarter We definitely need a .sil file test to ensure that the parser can correctly handle this. I would also be fine with round tripping *.swift through sil-opt.

gottesmm · 2017-01-26T20:22:49Z

But a *.sil file is a better solution since it creates a mark in the codebase that this code is tested in an expected way.

…d witness_method instructions. Textual SIL was sometimes ambiguous when SILDeclRefs were used, because the textual representation of SILDeclRefs was the same for functions that have the same name, but different signatures.

swiftix · 2017-01-26T22:30:51Z

@swift-ci Please smoke test

swiftix · 2017-01-26T22:31:14Z

@swift-ci Please smoke test

swiftix force-pushed the wip-textual-sil-sildeclrefs branch from d925d55 to 7dda6c0 Compare August 5, 2016 22:31

tkremenek assigned swiftix Aug 6, 2016

swiftix force-pushed the wip-textual-sil-sildeclrefs branch from 7dda6c0 to 9e27ed6 Compare August 10, 2016 04:32

akyrtzi referenced this pull request Aug 15, 2016

[ASTPrinter] Prefer TypeReprs for printing generic requirements for S…

434b61f

…IL printing Worksaround the issue that type objects do not preserve info to print requirements accurately. rdar://27794707

swiftix force-pushed the wip-textual-sil-sildeclrefs branch from 9e27ed6 to d503072 Compare January 25, 2017 19:09

jckarter self-requested a review January 26, 2017 01:09

jckarter reviewed Jan 26, 2017

View reviewed changes

swiftix force-pushed the wip-textual-sil-sildeclrefs branch from d503072 to bf2dcbf Compare January 26, 2017 22:30

swiftix merged commit b74c786 into swiftlang:master Jan 26, 2017

moiseev mentioned this pull request Jan 27, 2017

Revert "Use function signatures for SILDeclRefs in witness_tables, vtables and witness_method instructions" #7070

Merged

Use function signatures for SILDeclRefs in witness_tables, vtables and witness_method instructions #4048

Use function signatures for SILDeclRefs in witness_tables, vtables and witness_method instructions #4048

Uh oh!

Conversation

swiftix commented Aug 5, 2016

What's in this pull request?

Resolved bug number: (SR-)

Uh oh!

swiftix commented Aug 5, 2016

Uh oh!

swiftix commented Aug 5, 2016

Uh oh!

gottesmm commented Aug 5, 2016

Uh oh!

swiftix commented Aug 5, 2016

Uh oh!

gottesmm commented Aug 5, 2016

Uh oh!

swiftix commented Aug 5, 2016

Uh oh!

swiftix commented Aug 5, 2016

Uh oh!

jckarter commented Aug 5, 2016

Uh oh!

shahmishal commented Aug 6, 2016

Uh oh!

tkremenek commented Aug 6, 2016

Uh oh!

swiftix commented Aug 6, 2016

Uh oh!

swiftix commented Aug 7, 2016

Uh oh!

swiftix commented Aug 9, 2016

Uh oh!

slavapestov commented Aug 9, 2016

Uh oh!

swiftix commented Aug 10, 2016

Uh oh!

swiftix commented Aug 10, 2016

Uh oh!

swiftix commented Aug 10, 2016

Uh oh!

swiftix commented Aug 10, 2016

Uh oh!

swiftix commented Aug 10, 2016

Uh oh!

swiftix commented Aug 10, 2016

Uh oh!

swiftix commented Aug 10, 2016

Uh oh!

swiftix commented Aug 10, 2016

Uh oh!

swiftix commented Aug 13, 2016

Uh oh!

tkremenek commented Aug 16, 2016

Uh oh!

slavapestov commented Jan 10, 2017

Uh oh!

swiftix commented Jan 25, 2017

Uh oh!

swiftix commented Jan 25, 2017

Uh oh!

shahmishal commented Jan 25, 2017

Uh oh!

swiftix commented Jan 26, 2017

Uh oh!

swiftix commented Jan 26, 2017

Uh oh!

jckarter Jan 26, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jckarter commented Jan 26, 2017

Uh oh!

gottesmm commented Jan 26, 2017

Uh oh!

gottesmm commented Jan 26, 2017

Uh oh!

swiftix commented Jan 26, 2017

Uh oh!

swiftix commented Jan 26, 2017