-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.5k
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
Backports for 1.2.0 release #32592
Backports for 1.2.0 release #32592
Conversation
…artesian coordinates (#32007) Revert "sparse findnext findprev hash performance improved (#31354)" This seems to duplicate work from #23317 and it causes performance degradation in the cases that one was designed for. See #31354 (comment) This reverts commit e0bef65. Thanks to @mbauman for spotting this issue in #32007 (comment). (cherry picked from commit ec797ef)
Might as well backport #32054 if the branding also got backported ? |
Yes that would be a good idea. |
The bug here is a bit subtle, but perhaps best illustrated with the included test case: ``` function f32579(x::Int64, b::Bool) if b x = nothing end if isa(x, Int64) y = x else y = x end if isa(y, Nothing) z = y else z = y end return z === nothing end ``` The code just after SSA conversion looks like: ``` 2 1 ─ goto #3 if not _3 3 2 ─ %2 = Main.nothing::Core.Compiler.Const(nothing, false) 5 3 ┄ %3 = φ (#2 => %2, #1 => _2)::Union{Nothing, Int64} │ %4 = (%3 isa Main.Int64)::Bool └── goto #5 if not %4 6 4 ─ %6 = π (%3, Int64) └── goto #6 8 5 ─ %8 = π (%3, Nothing) 10 6 ┄ %9 = φ (#4 => %6, #5 => %8)::Union{Nothing, Int64} │ %10 = (%9 isa Main.Nothing)::Bool └── goto #8 if not %10 11 7 ─ %12 = π (%9, Nothing) └── goto #9 13 8 ─ %14 = π (%9, Int64) 15 9 ┄ %15 = φ (#7 => %12, #8 => %14)::Union{Nothing, Int64} │ %16 = (%15 === Main.nothing)::Bool └── return %16 ``` Now, we have special code in SROA (despite it not really being an SROA transform) that looks at `===` and replaces it by a nest of phis of booleans. The reasoning for this transform is that it eliminates a use of a value where we only care about the type and not the content, thus making it more likely that the value will subsequently be eligible for SROA. In addition, while it goes along resolving which values feed into any particular phi, it accumulates and type conditions it encounters along the way. Thus in the example above, something like the following happens: - We look at %14, which πs to %9 with an Int64 constraint, so we only consider the #4 predecessor for %9 (due to the constraint), until we get to %3, where we again only consider the #1 predecessor, where we find the argument (of type Int64) and conclude the result is always false - Now we pop the next item of the stack from our original phi, look at %12, which πs to %9 with a Nothing constraint. At this point we used to terminate the search because we already looked at %9. However, crucially, we looked at %9 only with an Int64 constraint, so we missed the fact that `nothing` was in fact a possible value for this phi. The result was a missing entry in the generated phi node: ``` 1 ─ goto #3 if not b 2 ─ %2 = Main.nothing::Core.Compiler.Const(nothing, false) 3 ┄ %3 = φ (#1 => false)::Bool │ %4 = φ (#2 => %2, #1 => _2)::Union{Nothing, Int64} │ %5 = (%4 isa Main.Int64)::Bool └── goto #5 if not %5 4 ─ %7 = π (%4, Int64) └── goto #6 5 ─ %9 = π (%4, Nothing) 6 ┄ %10 = φ (#4 => %3, #5 => %3)::Bool │ %11 = φ (#4 => %7, #5 => %9)::Union{Nothing, Int64} │ %12 = (%11 isa Main.Nothing)::Bool └── goto #8 if not %12 7 ─ goto #9 8 ─ nothing::Nothing 9 ┄ %16 = φ (#7 => %10, #8 => %10)::Bool └── return %16 ``` (note the missing #2 predecessor in phi node %3), which would result in an undefined value at runtime, though in this case LLVM would have taken advantage of that to just return 0: ``` define i8 @julia_f32579_16051(i64, i8) { top: ; @ REPL[1]:15 within `f32579' ret i8 0 } ``` Compare this now to the optimized IR with this patch: ``` 1 ─ goto #3 if not b 2 ─ %2 = Main.nothing::Core.Compiler.Const(nothing, false) 3 ┄ %3 = φ (#2 => true, #1 => false)::Bool │ %4 = φ (#2 => %2, #1 => _2)::Union{Nothing, Int64} │ %5 = (%4 isa Main.Int64)::Bool └── goto #5 if not %5 4 ─ %7 = π (%4, Int64) └── goto #6 5 ─ %9 = π (%4, Nothing) 6 ┄ %10 = φ (#4 => %3, #5 => %3)::Bool │ %11 = φ (#4 => %7, #5 => %9)::Union{Nothing, Int64} │ %12 = (%11 isa Main.Nothing)::Bool └── goto #8 if not %12 7 ─ goto #9 8 ─ nothing::Nothing 9 ┄ %16 = φ (#7 => %10, #8 => %10)::Bool └── return %16 ``` The %3 phi node has its missing entry and the generated LLVM code correctly returns `b`: ``` define i8 @julia_f32579_16112(i64, i8) { top: %2 = and i8 %1, 1 ; @ REPL[1]:15 within `f32579' ret i8 %2 } ``` (cherry picked from commit 0a12944)
* Fix jl_obvious_subtype with INT vararg constraint * Fix a vararg-related non-transitivity in subtyping * Fix another vararg subtype issue * Take advantage of their being at most one UnionAll wrapped around a Vararg Upon construction, we normalize `Vararg{T, N} where {T,N}` to `Vararg{T where T, N} where N`, thus there can be at most one UnionAll wrapper around a Vararg. In subtyping we were already assuming that there can be at most two such wrappers, so simply adjust that and add an appropriate assertion to make sure we catch any cases where this ever goes wrong. * Rewrite subtype_tuple to fix extra cases * Put back the case for naked varargs * Update test/subtype.jl Co-Authored-By: Keno <[email protected]> * Add test for #31805 * Fix style review comments * Rename variable * In person review changes * Fix bug * Handle integer bounds on left arguments in the environment In subtyping proper, variables introduced on the left (i.e. forall variables) don't have any equality constraints, because we have no syntax for creating them. However, intersection does sometimes create such environments, so we need to handle it in subtyping. (Cherry-picked from 4a38e79)
@nanosoldier |
Your benchmark job has completed - possible performance regressions were detected. A full report can be found here. cc @ararslan |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
The DataFrames.jl failure looks like #32607 |
The Cbc issue was addressed in jump-dev/Cbc.jl#115 and made it into a tag but it's still failing with the same error. |
Regarding Cbc, they directly include a test from another package which happens to use Compat: https://github.com/JuliaOpt/Cbc.jl/blob/8fe080bdc21265c7b4b14c39c70c8848823927a8/test/MPB_wrapper.jl#L5 so they do need Compat... |
Fix for Cumulants: iitis/Cumulants.jl#14 |
Fix for Cbc: jump-dev/Cbc.jl#118 |
Looks like BlackBoxOptim and HypothesisTests are broken by printing changes |
MLDataPattern is the same as previous runs: #31727 (comment) cc @Evizero |
UnicodePlots issue persists: #31727 (comment) |
NearestNeighborDescent also seems like an inference regression. |
FYI: robertfeldt/BlackBoxOptim.jl#128 should fix the PkgEval failure |
PolynomialRings and StrBase are new method ambiguities. |
Backport 32054
It seems like the possibly interesting ones there to look into more closely are: |
I don't think SQLite is actually a problem; it uses serialization for custom types, so if anything gets tweaked there, it breaks. |
I've edited my comment above with the results of a run which does not skip packages for which a dependency fails tests. I went through and checked off the usual suspects from earlier and submitted a bunch of PRs to fix the new minor things. There are a couple of failures I don't understand in addition to the ones Jameson noted above. |
Rotations: just some changed printing |
ArnoldiMethod: is getting different numbers. Needs to be looked at by somebody who knows about numbers. |
QuantumLattices: some block expression now includes a location that didn't previously |
RandomMatrices: also different numbers |
GPUifyLoops: Needs a test dependency on InteractiveUtils? |
IntervalArithmetic: Inference widened to Any |
Dolang and SolverTools both reduced to this intersection regression:
edit: bisected to 0d9c72d |
IntervalArithmetic is a known package issue (JuliaIntervals/IntervalArithmetic.jl#291) |
#32592 (comment) fixed GPUifyLoops |
According to @andreasnoack, ArnoldiMethod |
ArnoldiMethod failures are fixed by https://github.com/haampie/ArnoldiMethod.jl/pull/99 |
Ok, great. In that case I think we're ready to merge this and put out the next RC, which I have high hopes will be final. |
We should backport #32853 first. Also note that LanguageServer seems like it could be a real regression. |
) (cherry picked from commit 5dbcf20)
I think LanguageServer is fixed: julia-vscode/LanguageServer.jl#372 |
Excellent! I looked at MatrixNetworks but couldn't figure out what the deal was, and I think that's the last unchecked item. |
Master of |
You're right, MatrixNetworks master passes locally for me on this branch. Thanks! |
We put quite a lot of commits here without a nanosoldier run, so running one here. @nanosoldier |
Your benchmark job has completed - possible performance regressions were detected. A full report can be found here. cc @ararslan |
Backported PRs:
for
insidedo
inside call #32476 - fix Parsing issue when using threads macro #32467, parsing macro onfor
insidedo
inside call=== nothing
is not== nothing
with--code-coverage=user
#32579 - Issue in typeconstraint accumulationNeed manual backport:
Non-merged PRs with backport label: