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.

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

[v11.x backport] deps: v8, cherry-pick 9365d09 #25728

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

bcoe
Copy link
Contributor

@bcoe bcoe commented Jan 26, 2019

backport fixes for terminal return statements (https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/v8/v8/+/1339119).

doesn't apply cleanly, so would appreciate eyes of @hashseed, @schuay

see: #25429

Checklist
  • make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
  • commit message follows commit guidelines

@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added v11.x v8 engine Issues and PRs related to the V8 dependency. labels Jan 26, 2019
  Original commit message 9365d09:

      [coverage] Rework continuation counter handling

      This changes a few bits about how continuation counters are handled.

      It introduces a new mechanism that allows removal of a continuation
      range after it has been created. If coverage is enabled, we run a first
      post-processing pass on the AST immediately after parsing, which
      removes problematic continuation ranges in two situations:

      1. nested continuation counters - only the outermost stays alive.
      2. trailing continuation counters within a block-like structure are
         removed if the containing structure itself has a continuation.

      [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

      Bug: v8:8381, v8:8539
      Change-Id: I6bcaea5060d8c481d7bae099f6db9f993cc30ee3
      Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/1339119
      Reviewed-by: Yang Guo <[email protected]>
      Reviewed-by: Leszek Swirski <[email protected]>
      Reviewed-by: Georg Neis <[email protected]>
      Commit-Queue: Jakob Gruber <[email protected]>
      Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#58443}

  Refs: v8/v8@9365d09

  Original commit message aac2f8c:

      [coverage] Filter out singleton ranges that alias full ranges

      Block coverage is based on a system of ranges that can either have
      both a start and end position, or only a start position (so-called
      singleton ranges). When formatting coverage information, singletons
      are expanded until the end of the immediate full parent range. E.g.
      in:

      {0, 10}  // Full range.
      {5, -1}  // Singleton range.

      the singleton range is expanded to {5, 10}.

      Singletons are produced mostly for continuation counters that track
      whether we execute past a specific language construct.

      Unfortunately, continuation counters can turn up in spots that confuse
      our post-processing. For example:

      if (true) { ... block1 ... } else { ... block2 ... }

      If block1 produces a continuation counter, it could end up with the
      same start position as the else-branch counter. Since we merge
      identical blocks, the else-branch could incorrectly end up with an
      execution count of one.

      We need to avoid merging such cases. A full range should always take
      precedence over a singleton range; a singleton range should never
      expand to completely fill a full range. An additional post-processing
      pass ensures this.

      Bug: v8:8237
      Change-Id: Idb3ec7b2feddc0585313810b9c8be1e9f4ec64bf
      Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/1273095
      Reviewed-by: Georg Neis <[email protected]>
      Reviewed-by: Yang Guo <[email protected]>
      Commit-Queue: Jakob Gruber <[email protected]>
      Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#56531}

  Refs: v8/v8@aac2f8c

  deps: V8: backport 47d34a3

  Original commit message:

      Revert "[coverage] change block range to avoid ambiguity."

      This reverts commit 471fef0469d04d7c487f3a08e81f3d77566a2f50.

      Reason for revert: A more general fix incoming at https://crrev.com/c/1273095.

      Original change's description:
      > [coverage] change block range to avoid ambiguity.
      >
      > By moving the block range end to left of closing bracket,
      > we can avoid ambiguity where an open-ended singleton range
      > could be both interpreted as inside the parent range, or
      > next to it.
      >
      > R=<U+200B>[email protected]
      >
      > Bug: v8:8237
      > Change-Id: Ibc9412b31efe900b6d8bff0d8fa8c52ddfbf460a
      > Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1254127
      > Reviewed-by: Georg Neis <[email protected]>
      > Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]>
      > Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#56347}

      [email protected],[email protected],[email protected]

      # Not skipping CQ checks because original CL landed > 1 day ago.

      Bug: v8:8237
      Change-Id: I39310cf3c2f06a0d98ff314740aaeefbfffc0834
      Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/1273096
      Reviewed-by: Jakob Gruber <[email protected]>
      Reviewed-by: Toon Verwaest <[email protected]>
      Reviewed-by: Yang Guo <[email protected]>
      Commit-Queue: Jakob Gruber <[email protected]>
      Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#56513}

  Refs: v8/v8@47d34a3

PR-URL: nodejs#25429
Backport-PR-URL: nodejs#25728
Reviewed-By: Yang Guo <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <[email protected]>
@addaleax
Copy link
Member

addaleax commented Jan 28, 2019

@targos
Copy link
Member

targos commented Jan 28, 2019

@bcoe
Copy link
Contributor Author

bcoe commented Jan 28, 2019

@addaleax @targos it's looking like tests are green for both V8 and Node.js, alright to land?

@bcoe bcoe requested a review from targos January 29, 2019 00:41
};

class BinaryOperationSourceRanges final : public AstNodeSourceRanges {
public:
explicit BinaryOperationSourceRanges(const SourceRange& right_range)
: right_range_(right_range) {}

SourceRange GetRange(SourceRangeKind kind) {
SourceRange GetRange(SourceRangeKind kind) override {
DCHECK_EQ(kind, SourceRangeKind::kRight);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In the original this was changed to DCHECK(HasRange(kind)) as well. Little difference. Just for the record.

@@ -79,11 +85,20 @@ class ContinuationSourceRanges : public AstNodeSourceRanges {
explicit ContinuationSourceRanges(int32_t continuation_position)
: continuation_position_(continuation_position) {}

SourceRange GetRange(SourceRangeKind kind) {
SourceRange GetRange(SourceRangeKind kind) override {
DCHECK_EQ(kind, SourceRangeKind::kContinuation);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ditto.

@@ -99,11 +114,15 @@ class CaseClauseSourceRanges final : public AstNodeSourceRanges {
explicit CaseClauseSourceRanges(const SourceRange& body_range)
: body_range_(body_range) {}

SourceRange GetRange(SourceRangeKind kind) {
SourceRange GetRange(SourceRangeKind kind) override {
DCHECK_EQ(kind, SourceRangeKind::kBody);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ditto.

Copy link
Member

@hashseed hashseed left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm, but commit description is a bit misleading. I don't think aac2f8c nor 47d34a3 have been backmerged.

47d34a3 is a revert. Both the original and this revert landed in 7.1, and does not affect v11, which is based on 7.0.
aac2f8c has been initially landed in 7.1, but merged back to 7.0 and already been picked up by Node v11 as well.

@bcoe
Copy link
Contributor Author

bcoe commented Jan 29, 2019

@hashseed so, in the case of this backport, we're only really cherry-picking 9365d09?

With regards to the debug checks, is it okay to leave them DCHECK_EQ(kind, SourceRangeKind::kRight);?

@bcoe bcoe changed the title [v11.x backport] deps: v8, cherry-pick 9365d09, aac2f8c, 47d34a3 [v11.x backport] deps: v8, cherry-pick 9365d09 Jan 30, 2019
@addaleax
Copy link
Member

@targos Do you want to land this & include it in 11.9.0?

@targos
Copy link
Member

targos commented Jan 30, 2019

@addaleax Sorry, I'm just seeing your message now. 11.9.0 is already out.

@bcoe
Copy link
Contributor Author

bcoe commented Jan 31, 2019

@targos @addaleax do we know who will be managing the release of v11.10.0; can we try to get this merged in? should make coverage feel a bit less broken.

addaleax pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 1, 2019
  Original commit message 9365d09:

      [coverage] Rework continuation counter handling

      This changes a few bits about how continuation counters are handled.

      It introduces a new mechanism that allows removal of a continuation
      range after it has been created. If coverage is enabled, we run a first
      post-processing pass on the AST immediately after parsing, which
      removes problematic continuation ranges in two situations:

      1. nested continuation counters - only the outermost stays alive.
      2. trailing continuation counters within a block-like structure are
         removed if the containing structure itself has a continuation.

      [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

      Bug: v8:8381, v8:8539
      Change-Id: I6bcaea5060d8c481d7bae099f6db9f993cc30ee3
      Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/1339119
      Reviewed-by: Yang Guo <[email protected]>
      Reviewed-by: Leszek Swirski <[email protected]>
      Reviewed-by: Georg Neis <[email protected]>
      Commit-Queue: Jakob Gruber <[email protected]>
      Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#58443}

  Refs: v8/v8@9365d09

  Original commit message aac2f8c:

      [coverage] Filter out singleton ranges that alias full ranges

      Block coverage is based on a system of ranges that can either have
      both a start and end position, or only a start position (so-called
      singleton ranges). When formatting coverage information, singletons
      are expanded until the end of the immediate full parent range. E.g.
      in:

      {0, 10}  // Full range.
      {5, -1}  // Singleton range.

      the singleton range is expanded to {5, 10}.

      Singletons are produced mostly for continuation counters that track
      whether we execute past a specific language construct.

      Unfortunately, continuation counters can turn up in spots that confuse
      our post-processing. For example:

      if (true) { ... block1 ... } else { ... block2 ... }

      If block1 produces a continuation counter, it could end up with the
      same start position as the else-branch counter. Since we merge
      identical blocks, the else-branch could incorrectly end up with an
      execution count of one.

      We need to avoid merging such cases. A full range should always take
      precedence over a singleton range; a singleton range should never
      expand to completely fill a full range. An additional post-processing
      pass ensures this.

      Bug: v8:8237
      Change-Id: Idb3ec7b2feddc0585313810b9c8be1e9f4ec64bf
      Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/1273095
      Reviewed-by: Georg Neis <[email protected]>
      Reviewed-by: Yang Guo <[email protected]>
      Commit-Queue: Jakob Gruber <[email protected]>
      Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#56531}

  Refs: v8/v8@aac2f8c

  deps: V8: backport 47d34a3

  Original commit message:

      Revert "[coverage] change block range to avoid ambiguity."

      This reverts commit 471fef0469d04d7c487f3a08e81f3d77566a2f50.

      Reason for revert: A more general fix incoming at https://crrev.com/c/1273095.

      Original change's description:
      > [coverage] change block range to avoid ambiguity.
      >
      > By moving the block range end to left of closing bracket,
      > we can avoid ambiguity where an open-ended singleton range
      > could be both interpreted as inside the parent range, or
      > next to it.
      >
      > R=<U+200B>[email protected]
      >
      > Bug: v8:8237
      > Change-Id: Ibc9412b31efe900b6d8bff0d8fa8c52ddfbf460a
      > Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1254127
      > Reviewed-by: Georg Neis <[email protected]>
      > Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]>
      > Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#56347}

      [email protected],[email protected],[email protected]

      # Not skipping CQ checks because original CL landed > 1 day ago.

      Bug: v8:8237
      Change-Id: I39310cf3c2f06a0d98ff314740aaeefbfffc0834
      Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/1273096
      Reviewed-by: Jakob Gruber <[email protected]>
      Reviewed-by: Toon Verwaest <[email protected]>
      Reviewed-by: Yang Guo <[email protected]>
      Commit-Queue: Jakob Gruber <[email protected]>
      Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#56513}

  Refs: v8/v8@47d34a3

PR-URL: #25429
Backport-PR-URL: #25728
Reviewed-By: Yang Guo <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <[email protected]>

Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]>
@addaleax
Copy link
Member

addaleax commented Feb 1, 2019

Landed in 673e434, thanks for the reminders!

@addaleax addaleax closed this Feb 1, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
v8 engine Issues and PRs related to the V8 dependency.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants