Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Add stage=1 in mk/build.mk #8

Open
dfordivam opened this issue Jul 16, 2018 · 2 comments
Open

Add stage=1 in mk/build.mk #8

dfordivam opened this issue Jul 16, 2018 · 2 comments

Comments

@dfordivam
Copy link
Member

dfordivam commented Jul 16, 2018 •
edited
Loading

With Stage1Only flag stage2 is still built...

# You may wonder why Stage1Only=YES still builds compiler/stage2. Quoting # simonmar in #7639:
#
#     "strictly speaking building compiler/stage2 is correct, because it is
#     the ghc package that can be used with [ghc-stage1]. If you don't
#     want to build it, then setting stage=1 in your mk/build.mk should
#     disable it."
@dfordivam
Copy link
Member Author

or perhaps add this comment somewhere, so that while hacking one doesn't have to build stage2.

@dfordivam
Copy link
Member Author

Will have to add an option here pkgs/development/compilers/ghc/head.nix

ElvishJerricco pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jan 9, 2019
@osa1 @bgamari
Fix a race between GC threads in concurrent scavenging
d46dd45 
While debugging #15285 I realized that free block lists (free_list in
BlockAlloc.c) get corrupted when multiple scavenge threads allocate and
release blocks concurrently. Here's a picture of one such race:

    Thread 2 (Thread 32573.32601):
    #0  check_tail
        (bd=0x940d40 <stg_TSO_info>) at rts/sm/BlockAlloc.c:860
    #1  0x0000000000928ef7 in checkFreeListSanity
        () at rts/sm/BlockAlloc.c:896
    #2  0x0000000000928979 in freeGroup
        (p=0x7e998ce02880) at rts/sm/BlockAlloc.c:721
    #3  0x0000000000928a17 in freeChain
        (bd=0x7e998ce02880) at rts/sm/BlockAlloc.c:738
    #4  0x0000000000926911 in freeChain_sync
        (bd=0x7e998ce02880) at rts/sm/GCUtils.c:80
    #5  0x0000000000934720 in scavenge_capability_mut_lists
        (cap=0x1acae80) at rts/sm/Scav.c:1665
    #6  0x000000000092b411 in gcWorkerThread
        (cap=0x1acae80) at rts/sm/GC.c:1157
    #7  0x000000000090be9a in yieldCapability
        (pCap=0x7f9994e69e20, task=0x7e9984000b70, gcAllowed=true) at rts/Capability.c:861
    #8  0x0000000000906120 in scheduleYield
        (pcap=0x7f9994e69e50, task=0x7e9984000b70) at rts/Schedule.c:673
    #9  0x0000000000905500 in schedule
        (initialCapability=0x1acae80, task=0x7e9984000b70) at rts/Schedule.c:293
    #10 0x0000000000908d4f in scheduleWorker
        (cap=0x1acae80, task=0x7e9984000b70) at rts/Schedule.c:2554
    #11 0x000000000091a30a in workerStart
        (task=0x7e9984000b70) at rts/Task.c:444
    #12 0x00007f99937fa6db in start_thread
        (arg=0x7f9994e6a700) at pthread_create.c:463
    #13 0x000061654d59f88f in clone
        () at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/clone.S:95

    Thread 1 (Thread 32573.32573):
    #0  checkFreeListSanity
        () at rts/sm/BlockAlloc.c:887
    #1  0x0000000000928979 in freeGroup
        (p=0x7e998d303540) at rts/sm/BlockAlloc.c:721
    #2  0x0000000000926f23 in todo_block_full
        (size=513, ws=0x1aa8ce0) at rts/sm/GCUtils.c:264
    #3  0x00000000009583b9 in alloc_for_copy
        (size=513, gen_no=0) at rts/sm/Evac.c:80
    #4  0x000000000095850d in copy_tag_nolock
        (p=0x7e998c675f28, info=0x421d98 <Main_Large_con_info>, src=0x7e998d075d80, size=513,
        gen_no=0, tag=1) at rts/sm/Evac.c:153
    #5  0x0000000000959177 in evacuate
        (p=0x7e998c675f28) at rts/sm/Evac.c:715
    #6  0x0000000000932388 in scavenge_small_bitmap
        (p=0x7e998c675f28, size=1, bitmap=0) at rts/sm/Scav.c:271
    #7  0x0000000000934aaf in scavenge_stack
        (p=0x7e998c675f28, stack_end=0x7e998c676000) at rts/sm/Scav.c:1908
    #8  0x0000000000934295 in scavenge_one
        (p=0x7e998c66e000) at rts/sm/Scav.c:1466
    #9  0x0000000000934662 in scavenge_mutable_list
        (bd=0x7e998d300440, gen=0x1b1d880) at rts/sm/Scav.c:1643
    #10 0x0000000000934700 in scavenge_capability_mut_lists
        (cap=0x1aaa340) at rts/sm/Scav.c:1664
    #11 0x00000000009299b6 in GarbageCollect
        (collect_gen=0, do_heap_census=false, gc_type=2, cap=0x1aaa340, idle_cap=0x1b38aa0)
        at rts/sm/GC.c:378
    #12 0x0000000000907a4a in scheduleDoGC
        (pcap=0x7ffdec5b5310, task=0x1b36650, force_major=false) at rts/Schedule.c:1798
    #13 0x0000000000905de7 in schedule
        (initialCapability=0x1aaa340, task=0x1b36650) at rts/Schedule.c:546
    #14 0x0000000000908bc4 in scheduleWaitThread
        (tso=0x7e998c0067c8, ret=0x0, pcap=0x7ffdec5b5430) at rts/Schedule.c:2537
    ghc#15 0x000000000091b5a0 in rts_evalLazyIO
        (cap=0x7ffdec5b5430, p=0x9c11f0, ret=0x0) at rts/RtsAPI.c:530
    ghc#16 0x000000000091ca56 in hs_main
        (argc=1, argv=0x7ffdec5b5628, main_closure=0x9c11f0, rts_config=...) at rts/RtsMain.c:72
    ghc#17 0x0000000000421ea0 in main
        ()

In particular, dbl_link_onto() which is used to add a freed block to a
doubly-linked free list is not thread safe and corrupts the list when
called concurrently.

Note that thread 1 is to blame here as thread 2 is properly taking the
spinlock. With this patch we now take the spinlock when freeing a todo
block in GC, avoiding this race.

Test Plan:
- Tried slow validate locally: this patch does not introduce new failures.
- circleci: https://circleci.com/gh/ghc/ghc-diffs/283 The test got killed
  because it took 5 hours but T7919 (which was previously failing on circleci)
  passed.

Reviewers: simonmar, bgamari, erikd

Reviewed By: simonmar

Subscribers: rwbarton, carter

GHC Trac Issues: #15285

Differential Revision: https://phabricator.haskell.org/D5115

(cherry picked from commit c6fbac6)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@dfordivam