Skip to content

Revert "Cherry-pick 51d5d7bbae92493a5bfa7cc6b519de8a5bb32fdb from LLVM mainline" #8143

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 8, 2024

Conversation

natecook1000
Copy link
Member

Reverting #7797 and swiftlang/swift#69843, since they seem to be causing a miscompile when code throws in the middle of a modify access: https://ci.swift.org/job/oss-swift_tools-RA_stdlib-DA_test-simulators/3870/console

@asl
Copy link

asl commented Feb 8, 2024

@natecook1000 Will you please tag the original PR next time? I only suddenly realized that you reverted something as depending PRs started not to apply.

@asl
Copy link

asl commented Feb 8, 2024

@natecook1000 The test does not fail for me when running locally. Any idea how it could be debugged? What is the environment?

@aschwaighofer
Copy link

The log at https://ci.swift.org/job/oss-swift_tools-RA_stdlib-DA_test-simulators/3870/consoleText should contain some information.

The build command is:

+ /Users/ec2-user/jenkins/workspace/oss-swift_tools-RA_stdlib-DA_test-simulators/swift/utils/build-script --preset=buildbot,tools=RA,stdlib=DA install_destdir=/Users/ec2-user/jenkins/workspace/oss-swift_tools-RA_stdlib-DA_test-simulators/install installable_package=/Users/ec2-user/jenkins/workspace/oss-swift_tools-RA_stdlib-DA_test-simulators/oss-swift_tools-RA_stdlib-DA_test-simulators-b3870.tar.gz --cmake-c-launcher /usr/local/bin/sccache --cmake-cxx-launcher /usr/local/bin/sccache
note: skipping Xcode version check
[/Users/ec2-user/jenkins/workspace/oss-swift_tools-RA_stdlib-DA_test-simulators/swift/utils/build-script] NOTE: using preset "buildbot,tools=RA,stdlib=DA", which expands to 

/Users/ec2-user/jenkins/workspace/oss-swift_tools-RA_stdlib-DA_test-simulators/swift/utils/build-script --ios --tvos --watchos --test --validation-test --lit-args=-v --compiler-vendor=apple --verbose-build --build-ninja --build-swift-stdlib-unittest-extra --install-llvm --install-swift --install-swiftsyntax --skip-test-cmark --install-destdir=/Users/ec2-user/jenkins/workspace/oss-swift_tools-RA_stdlib-DA_test-simulators/install --installable-package=/Users/ec2-user/jenkins/workspace/oss-swift_tools-RA_stdlib-DA_test-simulators/oss-swift_tools-RA_stdlib-DA_test-simulators-b3870.tar.gz --reconfigure '--swift-install-components=back-deployment;compiler;clang-builtin-headers;libexec;stdlib;sdk-overlay;static-mirror-lib;editor-integration;tools;toolchain-tools;testsuite-tools;sourcekit-xpc-service;swift-remote-mirror;swift-remote-mirror-headers;swift-external-generic-metadata-builder;swift-external-generic-metadata-builder-headers' --release --assertions --swift-stdlib-build-type=Debug --swift-stdlib-enable-assertions=true --enable-array-cow-checks --skip-test-ios-host --skip-test-tvos-host --skip-test-watchos-host --cmake-c-launcher /usr/local/bin/sccache --cmake-cxx-launcher /usr/local/bin/sccache

The Xcode installed on the bots claims to be Xcode 15.1 (https://ci.swift.org)

https://ci.swift.org/job/oss-swift_tools-RA_stdlib-DA_test-simulators/3870 lists the git commits

@aschwaighofer
Copy link

The Swift standard library is build in debug mode with assertions:

-- Building Swift standard library and overlays for SDKs: IOS;IOS_SIMULATOR;OSX;TVOS;TVOS_SIMULATOR;WATCHOS;WATCHOS_SIMULATOR
--   Build type:       Debug
--   Assertions:       TRUE

@asl
Copy link

asl commented Feb 9, 2024

@aschwaighofer Thanks! Yes, I was finally able to reproduce the issue replicating the buildbot configuration. The debug stdlib is the key.

Looks like there subtle misalignment between LLVM side of coroutines support and what Swift assumes / expect that was exposed by this commit. I will likely workaround on Swift side and then work with LLVM co-routines code owner to see what would be the better overall resolution

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants