X-Git-Url: http://repo.macrolet.net/gitweb/?a=blobdiff_plain;f=tests%2Fgc.impure.lisp;h=e015ad8efea59195e535dd667613e4234b5f3726;hb=5193965ff7688f7d748962405343ed666bf616b2;hp=e1dd98dc80e34aa5b755c427997bcc54cb6bc6bc;hpb=47eb330ef0f3b99d24c0e24d897b757f16950c4b;p=sbcl.git diff --git a/tests/gc.impure.lisp b/tests/gc.impure.lisp index e1dd98d..e015ad8 100644 --- a/tests/gc.impure.lisp +++ b/tests/gc.impure.lisp @@ -31,15 +31,7 @@ (let ((gc-happend nil)) (push (lambda () (setq gc-happend t)) sb-ext:*after-gc-hooks*) - ;; check GC-{ON,OFF} works and gc is deferred - (gc-off) - (gc) - (assert (not gc-happend)) - (gc-on) - (assert gc-happend) - ;; check that WITHOUT-GCING defers explicit gc - (setq gc-happend nil) (sb-sys:without-gcing (gc) (assert (not gc-happend))) @@ -58,16 +50,68 @@ (assert (not gc-happend))) ;; give the hook time to run (sleep 1) - (assert gc-happend)) + (assert gc-happend))) - ;; check GC-ON works even in a WITHOUT-GCING - (setq gc-happend nil) - (sb-sys:without-gcing - (gc) - (assert (not gc-happend)) - (gc-on) - (assert gc-happend) - (setq gc-happend nil)) - (assert (not gc-happend))) +;;; SB-EXT:GENERATION-* accessors returned bogus values for generation > 0 +(with-test (:name :bug-529014 :skipped-on '(not :gencgc)) + (loop for i from 0 to sb-vm:+pseudo-static-generation+ + do (assert (= (sb-ext:generation-bytes-consed-between-gcs i) + (truncate (sb-ext:bytes-consed-between-gcs) + sb-vm:+highest-normal-generation+))) + ;; FIXME: These parameters are a) tunable in the source and b) + ;; duplicated multiple times there and now here. It would be good to + ;; OAOO-ify them (probably to src/compiler/generic/params.lisp). + (assert (= (sb-ext:generation-minimum-age-before-gc i) 0.75)) + (assert (= (sb-ext:generation-number-of-gcs-before-promotion i) 1)))) -(sb-ext:quit :unix-status 104) +(defun stress-gc () + ;; Kludge or not? I don't know whether the smaller allocation size + ;; for sb-safepoint is a legitimate correction to the test case, or + ;; rather hides the actual bug this test is checking for... It's also + ;; not clear to me whether the issue is actually safepoint-specific. + ;; But the main problem safepoint-related bugs tend to introduce is a + ;; delay in the GC triggering -- and if bug-936304 fails, it also + ;; causes bug-981106 to fail, even though there is a full GC in + ;; between, which makes it seem unlikely to me that the problem is + ;; delay- (and hence safepoint-) related. --DFL + (let* ((x (make-array (truncate #-sb-safepoint (* 0.2 (dynamic-space-size)) + #+sb-safepoint (* 0.1 (dynamic-space-size)) + sb-vm:n-word-bytes)))) + (elt x 0))) + +(with-test (:name :bug-936304) + (gc :full t) + (time + (assert (eq :ok (handler-case + (progn + (loop repeat 50 do (stress-gc)) + :ok) + (storage-condition () + :oom)))))) + +(with-test (:name :bug-981106) + (gc :full t) + (time + (assert (eq :ok + (handler-case + (dotimes (runs 100 :ok) + (let* ((n (truncate (dynamic-space-size) 1200)) + (len (length + (with-output-to-string (string) + (dotimes (i n) + (write-sequence "hi there!" string)))))) + (assert (eql len (* n (length "hi there!")))))) + (storage-condition () + :oom)))))) + +(with-test (:name :gc-logfile) + (assert (not (gc-logfile))) + (let ((p #p"gc.log")) + (assert (not (probe-file p))) + (assert (equal p (setf (gc-logfile) p))) + (gc) + (let ((p2 (gc-logfile))) + (assert (equal (truename p2) (truename p)))) + (assert (not (setf (gc-logfile) nil))) + (assert (not (gc-logfile))) + (delete-file p)))