X-Git-Url: http://repo.macrolet.net/gitweb/?a=blobdiff_plain;f=BUGS;h=2496243765ab47f6f4b05d8a7655a7a3dc191caf;hb=6bbc22725d3bf663726ed9adca544e39316364a6;hp=3dd6eec87746313577b3e918006f25de09ce57ce;hpb=41ebbebc360fc5b85e39d78fdaaba7d2f7577b10;p=sbcl.git diff --git a/BUGS b/BUGS index 3dd6eec..2496243 100644 --- a/BUGS +++ b/BUGS @@ -249,20 +249,17 @@ WORKAROUND: comfortable merging the patches in the CVS version of SBCL. 108: - (TIME (ROOM T)) reports more than 200 Mbytes consed even for - a clean, just-started SBCL system. And it seems to be right: - (ROOM T) can bring a small computer to its knees for a *long* - time trying to GC afterwards. Surely there's some more economical - way to implement (ROOM T). + ROOM issues: - Daniel Barlow doesn't know what fixed this, but observes that it - doesn't seem to be the case in 0.8.7.3 any more. Instead, (ROOM T) - in a fresh SBCL causes + a) ROOM works by walking over the heap linearly, instead of + following the object graph. Hence, it report garbage objects that + are unreachable. (Maybe this is a feature and not a bug?) - debugger invoked on a SB-INT:BUG in thread 5911: - failed AVER: "(SAP= CURRENT END)" - - unless a GC has happened beforehand. + b) ROOM uses MAP-ALLOCATED-OBJECTS to walk the heap, which doesn't + check all pointers as well as it should, and can hence become + confused, leading to aver failures. As of 1.0.13.21 these (the + SAP= aver in particular) should be mostly under control, but push + ROOM hard enough and it still might croak. 117: When the compiler inline expands functions, it may be that different @@ -482,6 +479,11 @@ WORKAROUND: (print (incf start 22)) (print (incf start 26)))))) + [ Update: 1.0.14.36 improved this quite a bit (20-25%) by + eliminating useless work from PROPAGATE-FROM-SETS -- but as alluded + below, maybe we should be smarter about when to decide a derived + type is "good enough". ] + This example could be solved with clever enough constraint propagation or with SSA, but consider @@ -1615,22 +1617,6 @@ WORKAROUND: For some more details see comments for (define-alien-type-method (c-string :deport-gen) ...) in host-c-call.lisp. -402: "DECLAIM DECLARATION does not inform the PCL code-walker" - reported by Vincent Arkesteijn: - - (declaim (declaration foo)) - (defgeneric bar (x)) - (defmethod bar (x) - (declare (foo x)) - x) - - ==> WARNING: The declaration FOO is not understood by - SB-PCL::SPLIT-DECLARATIONS. - Please put FOO on one of the lists SB-PCL::*NON-VAR-DECLARATIONS*, - SB-PCL::*VAR-DECLARATIONS-WITH-ARG*, or - SB-PCL::*VAR-DECLARATIONS-WITHOUT-ARG*. - (Assuming it is a variable declaration without argument). - 403: FORMAT/PPRINT-LOGICAL-BLOCK of CONDITIONs ignoring *PRINT-CIRCLE* In sbcl-0.9.13.34, (defparameter *c* @@ -1732,6 +1718,10 @@ WORKAROUND: 3: (SB-C::BOUND-FUNC ...) 4: (SB-C::%SINGLE-FLOAT-DERIVE-TYPE-AUX ...) + These are now fixed, but (COERCE HUGE 'SINGLE-FLOAT) still signals a + type-error at runtime. The question is, should it instead signal a + floating-point overflow, or return an infinity? + 408: SUBTYPEP confusion re. OR of SATISFIES of not-yet-defined predicate As reported by Levente M\'{e}sz\'{a}ros sbcl-devel 2006-02-20, (aver (equal (multiple-value-list @@ -1788,34 +1778,6 @@ WORKAROUND: implementation of read circularity, using a symbol as a marker for the previously-referenced object. -413: type-errors in ROOM - - (defvar *a* (make-array (expt 2 27))) - (room) - - Causes a type-error on 32bit SBCL, as various byte-counts in ROOM - implementation overrun fixnums. - - This was fixed in 1.0.4.89, but the patch was reverted as it caused - ROOM to cons sufficiently to make running it in a loop deadly on - GENCGC: newly allocated objects survived to generation 1, where next - call to ROOM would see them, and allocate even more... - - Reported by Faré Rideau on sbcl-devel. - -414: strange DISASSEMBLE warning - - Compiling and disassembling - - (defun disassemble-source-form-bug (x y z) - (declare (optimize debug)) - (list x y z)) - - Gives - - WARNING: bogus form-number in form! The source file has probably - been changed too much to cope with. - 415: Issues creating large arrays on x86-64/Linux and x86/Darwin (make-array (1- array-dimension-limit)) @@ -1881,6 +1843,35 @@ MISC.556 by falling into gdb with fatal error encountered in SBCL pid 2827: Unhandled SIGILL unless the MISC.556 test is commented out. +Analysis: + and a number of other arithmetic functions exhibit the +same behaviour. Here's the underlying problem: On x86 we perform +single-float + integer normally using double-precision, and then +coerce the result back to single-float. (The FILD instruction always +gives us a double-float, and unless we do MOVE-FROM-SINGLE it remains +one. Or so it seems to me, and that would also explain the observed +behaviour below.) + +During IR1 we derive the types for both + + (+ ) ; uses double-precision + (+ (FLOAT )) ; uses single-precision + +and get a mismatch for a number of unlucky arguments. This leads to +derived result type NIL, and ends up flushing the whole whole +operation -- and finally we generate code without a return sequence, +and fall through to whatever. + +The use of double-precision in the first case appears to be an +(un)happy accident -- interval arithmetic gives us the +double-precision result because that's what the backend does. + + (+ 8172.0 (coerce -95195347 'single-float)) ; => -9.518717e7 + (+ 8172.0 -95195347) ; => -9.5187176e7 + (coerce (+ 8172.0 (coerce -95195347 'double-float)) 'single-float) + ; => -9.5187176e7 + +Which should be fixed, the IR1, or the backend? + 421: READ-CHAR-NO-HANG misbehaviour on Windows Console: It seems that on Windows READ-CHAR-NO-HANG hangs if the user @@ -1888,3 +1879,32 @@ unless the MISC.556 test is commented out. seems to lie if the OS is buffering input for us on Console.) reported by Elliot Slaughter on sbcl-devel 2008/1/10. + +422: out-of-extent return not checked in safe code + + (declaim (optimize safety)) + (funcall (catch 't (block nil (throw 't (lambda () (return)))))) + +behaves ...erratically. Reported by Kevin Reid on sbcl-devel +2007-07-06. (We don't _have_ to check things like this, but we +generally try to check returns in safe code, so we should here too.) + +423: TRULY-THE and *CHECK-CONSISTENCY* + + The following signals errors due to TRULY-THEs in dead code: + + (let ((sb-c::*check-consistency* t)) + (handler-bind ((warning #'error)) + (flet ((make-lambda (type) + `(lambda (x) + ((lambda (z) + (if (listp z) + (let ((q (truly-the list z))) + (length q)) + (if (arrayp z) + (let ((q (truly-the vector z))) + (length q)) + (error "oops")))) + (the ,type x))))) + (compile nil (make-lambda 'list)) + (compile nil (make-lambda 'vector)))))