Skip to content

gh-134728: Don't deopt due to eval breaker in _TIER2_RESUME_CHECK #134729

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

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from
Closed

gh-134728: Don't deopt due to eval breaker in _TIER2_RESUME_CHECK #134729

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 2 commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
bef623c
Don't deopt due to eval breaker
Fidget-Spinner May 26, 2025
bf32158
📜🤖 Added by blurb_it.
blurb-it[bot] May 26, 2025
91cb673
remove outdated comment
Fidget-Spinner May 27, 2025
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion Include/internal/pycore_uop_metadata.h
View file
Open in desktop

Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.

1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions Misc/NEWS.d/next/Core_and_Builtins/2025-05-26-15-17-29.gh-issue-134728.YUJYfF.rst
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
Handle ``_TIER2_RESUME_CHECK`` in the JIT.
5 changes: 4 additions & 1 deletion Python/bytecodes.c
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -5400,7 +5400,10 @@ dummy_func(
_Py_emscripten_signal_clock -= Py_EMSCRIPTEN_SIGNAL_HANDLING;
#endif
uintptr_t eval_breaker = _Py_atomic_load_uintptr_relaxed(&tstate->eval_breaker);
DEOPT_IF(eval_breaker & _PY_EVAL_EVENTS_MASK);
if (eval_breaker & _PY_EVAL_EVENTS_MASK) {
int err = _Py_HandlePending(tstate);
ERROR_IF(err != 0);
}
Comment on lines +5401 to +5404
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just throwing this out there since I don't yet know enough about these specific instructions, but with this change,
_TIER2_RESUME_CHECK is now looking quite similar to _CHECK_PERIODIC. Is there any way we can combine them? Or do we need to keep them separate?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Possibly could replace _TIER2_RESUME_CHECK with _CHECK_PERIODIC.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ok I think maybe not, the assertions in TIER2_RESUME_CHECK are different.

assert(tstate->tracing || eval_breaker == FT_ATOMIC_LOAD_UINTPTR_ACQUIRE(_PyFrame_GetCode(frame)->_co_instrumentation_version));
}

Expand Down
8 changes: 6 additions & 2 deletions Python/executor_cases.c.h
View file
Open in desktop

Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.

Loading