Fix incorrect behavior noted via asserts - #34842

Merged
trylek merged 1 commit into
dotnet:masterfrom
davidwrighton:fix_crossgen2_asserts
Apr 12, 2020
Merged

Fix incorrect behavior noted via asserts#34842
trylek merged 1 commit into
dotnet:masterfrom
davidwrighton:fix_crossgen2_asserts

Conversation

@davidwrighton

@davidwrightondavidwrighton commented Apr 11, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
  • Multi-thread handling of UnboxingMethodDesc was incorrect. It would result in incorrect caching of fixups to unboxing methods. This would cause asserts and determinism failures.
  • ldtoken of a static method on a valuetype should not refer to an unboxing stub, This is unlikely to cause a failure, but will cause asserts to fire

@davidwrighton
Fix incorrect behavior noted while compiling large aspnet application…
adf86f7
… with debug build of compiler
- Multi-thread handling of UnboxingMethodDesc was incorrect. It would result in incorrect caching of fixups to unboxing methods
- ldtoken of a static method on a valuetype should not refer to an unboxing stub
trylek
trylek approved these changes Apr 12, 2020
View reviewed changes

@trylektrylek left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks great, thanks for fixing!

@trylek
trylek merged commit 8edd202 into dotnet:masterApr 12, 2020
@MichalStrehovsky

MichalStrehovsky commented Apr 20, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Per the comment for the UnboxingMethodDesc:

 /// This class is for internal purposes within the JitInterface. It's not expected
/// for it to escape the JitInterface.

Is this MethodDesc escaping the local CorInfoImpl class?

I don't think the rest of the system is prepared to handle a MethodDesc to an unboxing method. We explicitly designed the type system not to have a unboxing MethodDesc (and @davidwrighton was one of the proponents of that approach). I don't think the rest of the system is prepared to handle seeing it and we really don't want it to escape. We only have unboxing MethodDescs as a local wart so that we can hand something to RyuJIT while compiling a method and it's supposed to go away after.

CorInfoImpl is expected to unwrap it into things the rest of the system can handle (a bool specifying whether this is an unboxing thunk - like most of crossgen2 is doing). The fact that this is not happening sounds like the bug we should fix instead of introducing a static holding onto type system object. I really wish there was a Roslyn analyzer to block static fields - we should never have statics holding onto type system objects.

Can you please CC crossgen-contrib on crossgen2 changes in the future?

@davidwrighton

davidwrighton commented Apr 27, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

It IS escaping the CorInfoImpl class. I had forgotten about that portion of the design. We should open a bug and fix the problem.

@MichalStrehovskyMichalStrehovsky mentioned this pull request Apr 27, 2020
Closed
@MichalStrehovsky

MichalStrehovsky commented Apr 27, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

We should open a bug and fix the problem.

Filed #35531.

@ghostghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Dec 9, 2020
@davidwrighton
davidwrighton deleted the fix_crossgen2_asserts branch April 20, 2021 17:42
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Reviewers

@trylektrylektrylek approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

area-ReadyToRun

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@davidwrighton@MichalStrehovsky@trylek@Dotnet-GitSync-Bot
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Add copy buttons to all \u003cpre\u003e\u003ccode\u003e blocks\n(function() {\n function addCopyButtons() {\n document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {\n if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;\n codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');\n \n var btn = document.createElement('button');\n btn.textContent = 'Copy';\n btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';\n btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };\n btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };\n btn.onclick = function() {\n navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {\n btn.textContent = 'Copied!';\n setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);\n });\n };\n codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';\n codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);\n });\n }\n \n addCopyButtons();\n \n // Re-run on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "github.com"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '
Skip to content

Fix incorrect behavior noted via asserts - #34842

Merged
trylek merged 1 commit into
dotnet:masterfrom
davidwrighton:fix_crossgen2_asserts
Apr 12, 2020
Merged

Fix incorrect behavior noted via asserts#34842
trylek merged 1 commit into
dotnet:masterfrom
davidwrighton:fix_crossgen2_asserts

Conversation

@davidwrighton

@davidwrightondavidwrighton commented Apr 11, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
  • Multi-thread handling of UnboxingMethodDesc was incorrect. It would result in incorrect caching of fixups to unboxing methods. This would cause asserts and determinism failures.
  • ldtoken of a static method on a valuetype should not refer to an unboxing stub, This is unlikely to cause a failure, but will cause asserts to fire

@davidwrighton
Fix incorrect behavior noted while compiling large aspnet application…
adf86f7
… with debug build of compiler
- Multi-thread handling of UnboxingMethodDesc was incorrect. It would result in incorrect caching of fixups to unboxing methods
- ldtoken of a static method on a valuetype should not refer to an unboxing stub
trylek
trylek approved these changes Apr 12, 2020
View reviewed changes

@trylektrylek left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks great, thanks for fixing!

@trylek
trylek merged commit 8edd202 into dotnet:masterApr 12, 2020
@MichalStrehovsky

MichalStrehovsky commented Apr 20, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Per the comment for the UnboxingMethodDesc:

 /// This class is for internal purposes within the JitInterface. It's not expected
/// for it to escape the JitInterface.

Is this MethodDesc escaping the local CorInfoImpl class?

I don't think the rest of the system is prepared to handle a MethodDesc to an unboxing method. We explicitly designed the type system not to have a unboxing MethodDesc (and @davidwrighton was one of the proponents of that approach). I don't think the rest of the system is prepared to handle seeing it and we really don't want it to escape. We only have unboxing MethodDescs as a local wart so that we can hand something to RyuJIT while compiling a method and it's supposed to go away after.

CorInfoImpl is expected to unwrap it into things the rest of the system can handle (a bool specifying whether this is an unboxing thunk - like most of crossgen2 is doing). The fact that this is not happening sounds like the bug we should fix instead of introducing a static holding onto type system object. I really wish there was a Roslyn analyzer to block static fields - we should never have statics holding onto type system objects.

Can you please CC crossgen-contrib on crossgen2 changes in the future?

@davidwrighton

davidwrighton commented Apr 27, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

It IS escaping the CorInfoImpl class. I had forgotten about that portion of the design. We should open a bug and fix the problem.

@MichalStrehovskyMichalStrehovsky mentioned this pull request Apr 27, 2020
Closed
@MichalStrehovsky

MichalStrehovsky commented Apr 27, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

We should open a bug and fix the problem.

Filed #35531.

@ghostghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Dec 9, 2020
@davidwrighton
davidwrighton deleted the fix_crossgen2_asserts branch April 20, 2021 17:42
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Reviewers

@trylektrylektrylek approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

area-ReadyToRun

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@davidwrighton@MichalStrehovsky@trylek@Dotnet-GitSync-Bot
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode\n(function() {\n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '\n .markdown-body {\n color-scheme: dark light;\n }\n .markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }\n .markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }\n .markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }\n .markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }\n .markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }\n .markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }\n ';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n})();", "GitHub Dark Mode README Fix"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

Fix incorrect behavior noted via asserts - #34842

Merged
trylek merged 1 commit into
dotnet:masterfrom
davidwrighton:fix_crossgen2_asserts
Apr 12, 2020
Merged

Fix incorrect behavior noted via asserts#34842
trylek merged 1 commit into
dotnet:masterfrom
davidwrighton:fix_crossgen2_asserts

Conversation

@davidwrighton

@davidwrightondavidwrighton commented Apr 11, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
  • Multi-thread handling of UnboxingMethodDesc was incorrect. It would result in incorrect caching of fixups to unboxing methods. This would cause asserts and determinism failures.
  • ldtoken of a static method on a valuetype should not refer to an unboxing stub, This is unlikely to cause a failure, but will cause asserts to fire

@davidwrighton
Fix incorrect behavior noted while compiling large aspnet application…
adf86f7
… with debug build of compiler
- Multi-thread handling of UnboxingMethodDesc was incorrect. It would result in incorrect caching of fixups to unboxing methods
- ldtoken of a static method on a valuetype should not refer to an unboxing stub
trylek
trylek approved these changes Apr 12, 2020
View reviewed changes

@trylektrylek left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks great, thanks for fixing!

@trylek
trylek merged commit 8edd202 into dotnet:masterApr 12, 2020
@MichalStrehovsky

MichalStrehovsky commented Apr 20, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Per the comment for the UnboxingMethodDesc:

 /// This class is for internal purposes within the JitInterface. It's not expected
/// for it to escape the JitInterface.

Is this MethodDesc escaping the local CorInfoImpl class?

I don't think the rest of the system is prepared to handle a MethodDesc to an unboxing method. We explicitly designed the type system not to have a unboxing MethodDesc (and @davidwrighton was one of the proponents of that approach). I don't think the rest of the system is prepared to handle seeing it and we really don't want it to escape. We only have unboxing MethodDescs as a local wart so that we can hand something to RyuJIT while compiling a method and it's supposed to go away after.

CorInfoImpl is expected to unwrap it into things the rest of the system can handle (a bool specifying whether this is an unboxing thunk - like most of crossgen2 is doing). The fact that this is not happening sounds like the bug we should fix instead of introducing a static holding onto type system object. I really wish there was a Roslyn analyzer to block static fields - we should never have statics holding onto type system objects.

Can you please CC crossgen-contrib on crossgen2 changes in the future?

@davidwrighton

davidwrighton commented Apr 27, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

It IS escaping the CorInfoImpl class. I had forgotten about that portion of the design. We should open a bug and fix the problem.

@MichalStrehovskyMichalStrehovsky mentioned this pull request Apr 27, 2020
Closed
@MichalStrehovsky

MichalStrehovsky commented Apr 27, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

We should open a bug and fix the problem.

Filed #35531.

@ghostghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Dec 9, 2020
@davidwrighton
davidwrighton deleted the fix_crossgen2_asserts branch April 20, 2021 17:42
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Reviewers

@trylektrylektrylek approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

area-ReadyToRun

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@davidwrighton@MichalStrehovsky@trylek@Dotnet-GitSync-Bot
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer\n(function() {\n var ref = document.referrer;\n var terms = [];\n \n if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {\n var url = new URL(ref);\n var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');\n if (q) {\n terms = q.split(/\\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length \u003e 2; });\n }\n }\n \n if (terms.length === 0) return;\n \n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n \n function highlight(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node\n var text = node.textContent;\n var found = false;\n terms.forEach(function(term) {\n var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\\]\\\\]/g, '\\\\') + ')', 'gi');\n if (regex.test(text)) {\n found = true;\n var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();\n var parts = text.split(regex);\n parts.forEach(function(part, i) {\n if (i % 2 === 0) {\n frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));\n } else {\n var span = document.createElement('span');\n span.className = 'userscript-highlight';\n span.textContent = part;\n frag.appendChild(span);\n }\n });\n node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);\n }\n });\n } else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element\n var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];\n if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {\n Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);\n }\n }\n }\n \n highlight(document.body);\n \n // Re-highlight on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Highlight Search Terms"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

Fix incorrect behavior noted via asserts - #34842

Merged
trylek merged 1 commit into
dotnet:masterfrom
davidwrighton:fix_crossgen2_asserts
Apr 12, 2020
Merged

Fix incorrect behavior noted via asserts#34842
trylek merged 1 commit into
dotnet:masterfrom
davidwrighton:fix_crossgen2_asserts

Conversation

@davidwrighton

@davidwrightondavidwrighton commented Apr 11, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
  • Multi-thread handling of UnboxingMethodDesc was incorrect. It would result in incorrect caching of fixups to unboxing methods. This would cause asserts and determinism failures.
  • ldtoken of a static method on a valuetype should not refer to an unboxing stub, This is unlikely to cause a failure, but will cause asserts to fire

@davidwrighton
Fix incorrect behavior noted while compiling large aspnet application…
adf86f7
… with debug build of compiler
- Multi-thread handling of UnboxingMethodDesc was incorrect. It would result in incorrect caching of fixups to unboxing methods
- ldtoken of a static method on a valuetype should not refer to an unboxing stub
trylek
trylek approved these changes Apr 12, 2020
View reviewed changes

@trylektrylek left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks great, thanks for fixing!

@trylek
trylek merged commit 8edd202 into dotnet:masterApr 12, 2020
@MichalStrehovsky

MichalStrehovsky commented Apr 20, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Per the comment for the UnboxingMethodDesc:

 /// This class is for internal purposes within the JitInterface. It's not expected
/// for it to escape the JitInterface.

Is this MethodDesc escaping the local CorInfoImpl class?

I don't think the rest of the system is prepared to handle a MethodDesc to an unboxing method. We explicitly designed the type system not to have a unboxing MethodDesc (and @davidwrighton was one of the proponents of that approach). I don't think the rest of the system is prepared to handle seeing it and we really don't want it to escape. We only have unboxing MethodDescs as a local wart so that we can hand something to RyuJIT while compiling a method and it's supposed to go away after.

CorInfoImpl is expected to unwrap it into things the rest of the system can handle (a bool specifying whether this is an unboxing thunk - like most of crossgen2 is doing). The fact that this is not happening sounds like the bug we should fix instead of introducing a static holding onto type system object. I really wish there was a Roslyn analyzer to block static fields - we should never have statics holding onto type system objects.

Can you please CC crossgen-contrib on crossgen2 changes in the future?

@davidwrighton

davidwrighton commented Apr 27, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

It IS escaping the CorInfoImpl class. I had forgotten about that portion of the design. We should open a bug and fix the problem.

@MichalStrehovskyMichalStrehovsky mentioned this pull request Apr 27, 2020
Closed
@MichalStrehovsky

MichalStrehovsky commented Apr 27, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

We should open a bug and fix the problem.

Filed #35531.

@ghostghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Dec 9, 2020
@davidwrighton
davidwrighton deleted the fix_crossgen2_asserts branch April 20, 2021 17:42
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Reviewers

@trylektrylektrylek approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

area-ReadyToRun

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@davidwrighton@MichalStrehovsky@trylek@Dotnet-GitSync-Bot
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page\n(function() {\n var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',\n 'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',\n 'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];\n \n function cleanUrl(url) {\n try {\n var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);\n var changed = false;\n trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {\n if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {\n u.searchParams.delete(p);\n changed = true;\n }\n });\n return changed ? u.toString() : url;\n } catch (e) {\n return url;\n }\n }\n \n function cleanLinks() {\n document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n \n cleanLinks();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1) {\n if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();\n node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Remove Tracking Parameters from Links"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "youtube.com"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '
Skip to content

Fix incorrect behavior noted via asserts - #34842

Merged
trylek merged 1 commit into
dotnet:masterfrom
davidwrighton:fix_crossgen2_asserts
Apr 12, 2020
Merged

Fix incorrect behavior noted via asserts#34842
trylek merged 1 commit into
dotnet:masterfrom
davidwrighton:fix_crossgen2_asserts

Conversation

@davidwrighton

@davidwrightondavidwrighton commented Apr 11, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
  • Multi-thread handling of UnboxingMethodDesc was incorrect. It would result in incorrect caching of fixups to unboxing methods. This would cause asserts and determinism failures.
  • ldtoken of a static method on a valuetype should not refer to an unboxing stub, This is unlikely to cause a failure, but will cause asserts to fire

@davidwrighton
Fix incorrect behavior noted while compiling large aspnet application…
adf86f7
… with debug build of compiler
- Multi-thread handling of UnboxingMethodDesc was incorrect. It would result in incorrect caching of fixups to unboxing methods
- ldtoken of a static method on a valuetype should not refer to an unboxing stub
trylek
trylek approved these changes Apr 12, 2020
View reviewed changes

@trylektrylek left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks great, thanks for fixing!

@trylek
trylek merged commit 8edd202 into dotnet:masterApr 12, 2020
@MichalStrehovsky

MichalStrehovsky commented Apr 20, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Per the comment for the UnboxingMethodDesc:

 /// This class is for internal purposes within the JitInterface. It's not expected
/// for it to escape the JitInterface.

Is this MethodDesc escaping the local CorInfoImpl class?

I don't think the rest of the system is prepared to handle a MethodDesc to an unboxing method. We explicitly designed the type system not to have a unboxing MethodDesc (and @davidwrighton was one of the proponents of that approach). I don't think the rest of the system is prepared to handle seeing it and we really don't want it to escape. We only have unboxing MethodDescs as a local wart so that we can hand something to RyuJIT while compiling a method and it's supposed to go away after.

CorInfoImpl is expected to unwrap it into things the rest of the system can handle (a bool specifying whether this is an unboxing thunk - like most of crossgen2 is doing). The fact that this is not happening sounds like the bug we should fix instead of introducing a static holding onto type system object. I really wish there was a Roslyn analyzer to block static fields - we should never have statics holding onto type system objects.

Can you please CC crossgen-contrib on crossgen2 changes in the future?

@davidwrighton

davidwrighton commented Apr 27, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

It IS escaping the CorInfoImpl class. I had forgotten about that portion of the design. We should open a bug and fix the problem.

@MichalStrehovskyMichalStrehovsky mentioned this pull request Apr 27, 2020
Closed
@MichalStrehovsky

MichalStrehovsky commented Apr 27, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

We should open a bug and fix the problem.

Filed #35531.

@ghostghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Dec 9, 2020
@davidwrighton
davidwrighton deleted the fix_crossgen2_asserts branch April 20, 2021 17:42
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Reviewers

@trylektrylektrylek approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

area-ReadyToRun

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@davidwrighton@MichalStrehovsky@trylek@Dotnet-GitSync-Bot
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube\n(function() {\n function tryTheater() {\n var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label=\"Theater mode\"], ytd-player #player button[title=\"Theater mode\"]');\n if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {\n btn.click();\n }\n }\n \n // Try immediately\n tryTheater();\n \n // Try after navigation (SPA)\n var lastUrl = location.href;\n setInterval(function() {\n if (location.href !== lastUrl) {\n lastUrl = location.href;\n setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);\n }\n }, 1000);\n \n // Also try on player load\n var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "YouTube Theater Mode Default"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

Fix incorrect behavior noted via asserts - #34842

Merged
trylek merged 1 commit into
dotnet:masterfrom
davidwrighton:fix_crossgen2_asserts
Apr 12, 2020
Merged

Fix incorrect behavior noted via asserts#34842
trylek merged 1 commit into
dotnet:masterfrom
davidwrighton:fix_crossgen2_asserts

Conversation

@davidwrighton

@davidwrightondavidwrighton commented Apr 11, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
  • Multi-thread handling of UnboxingMethodDesc was incorrect. It would result in incorrect caching of fixups to unboxing methods. This would cause asserts and determinism failures.
  • ldtoken of a static method on a valuetype should not refer to an unboxing stub, This is unlikely to cause a failure, but will cause asserts to fire

@davidwrighton
Fix incorrect behavior noted while compiling large aspnet application…
adf86f7
… with debug build of compiler
- Multi-thread handling of UnboxingMethodDesc was incorrect. It would result in incorrect caching of fixups to unboxing methods
- ldtoken of a static method on a valuetype should not refer to an unboxing stub
trylek
trylek approved these changes Apr 12, 2020
View reviewed changes

@trylektrylek left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks great, thanks for fixing!

@trylek
trylek merged commit 8edd202 into dotnet:masterApr 12, 2020
@MichalStrehovsky

MichalStrehovsky commented Apr 20, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Per the comment for the UnboxingMethodDesc:

 /// This class is for internal purposes within the JitInterface. It's not expected
/// for it to escape the JitInterface.

Is this MethodDesc escaping the local CorInfoImpl class?

I don't think the rest of the system is prepared to handle a MethodDesc to an unboxing method. We explicitly designed the type system not to have a unboxing MethodDesc (and @davidwrighton was one of the proponents of that approach). I don't think the rest of the system is prepared to handle seeing it and we really don't want it to escape. We only have unboxing MethodDescs as a local wart so that we can hand something to RyuJIT while compiling a method and it's supposed to go away after.

CorInfoImpl is expected to unwrap it into things the rest of the system can handle (a bool specifying whether this is an unboxing thunk - like most of crossgen2 is doing). The fact that this is not happening sounds like the bug we should fix instead of introducing a static holding onto type system object. I really wish there was a Roslyn analyzer to block static fields - we should never have statics holding onto type system objects.

Can you please CC crossgen-contrib on crossgen2 changes in the future?

@davidwrighton

davidwrighton commented Apr 27, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

It IS escaping the CorInfoImpl class. I had forgotten about that portion of the design. We should open a bug and fix the problem.

@MichalStrehovskyMichalStrehovsky mentioned this pull request Apr 27, 2020
Closed
@MichalStrehovsky

MichalStrehovsky commented Apr 27, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

We should open a bug and fix the problem.

Filed #35531.

@ghostghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Dec 9, 2020
@davidwrighton
davidwrighton deleted the fix_crossgen2_asserts branch April 20, 2021 17:42
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Reviewers

@trylektrylektrylek approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

area-ReadyToRun

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@davidwrighton@MichalStrehovsky@trylek@Dotnet-GitSync-Bot
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content\n(function() {\n function unstick() {\n document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role=\"banner\"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*=\"position: fixed\"], [style*=\"position:sticky\"]').forEach(function(el) {\n if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || \n getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {\n el.style.position = 'static';\n el.style.top = 'auto';\n el.style.zIndex = 'auto';\n }\n });\n }\n \n unstick();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });\n})();", "Kill Sticky Headers"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

Fix incorrect behavior noted via asserts - #34842

Merged
trylek merged 1 commit into
dotnet:masterfrom
davidwrighton:fix_crossgen2_asserts
Apr 12, 2020
Merged

Fix incorrect behavior noted via asserts#34842
trylek merged 1 commit into
dotnet:masterfrom
davidwrighton:fix_crossgen2_asserts

Conversation

@davidwrighton

@davidwrightondavidwrighton commented Apr 11, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
  • Multi-thread handling of UnboxingMethodDesc was incorrect. It would result in incorrect caching of fixups to unboxing methods. This would cause asserts and determinism failures.
  • ldtoken of a static method on a valuetype should not refer to an unboxing stub, This is unlikely to cause a failure, but will cause asserts to fire

@davidwrighton
Fix incorrect behavior noted while compiling large aspnet application…
adf86f7
… with debug build of compiler
- Multi-thread handling of UnboxingMethodDesc was incorrect. It would result in incorrect caching of fixups to unboxing methods
- ldtoken of a static method on a valuetype should not refer to an unboxing stub
trylek
trylek approved these changes Apr 12, 2020
View reviewed changes

@trylektrylek left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks great, thanks for fixing!

@trylek
trylek merged commit 8edd202 into dotnet:masterApr 12, 2020
@MichalStrehovsky

MichalStrehovsky commented Apr 20, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Per the comment for the UnboxingMethodDesc:

 /// This class is for internal purposes within the JitInterface. It's not expected
/// for it to escape the JitInterface.

Is this MethodDesc escaping the local CorInfoImpl class?

I don't think the rest of the system is prepared to handle a MethodDesc to an unboxing method. We explicitly designed the type system not to have a unboxing MethodDesc (and @davidwrighton was one of the proponents of that approach). I don't think the rest of the system is prepared to handle seeing it and we really don't want it to escape. We only have unboxing MethodDescs as a local wart so that we can hand something to RyuJIT while compiling a method and it's supposed to go away after.

CorInfoImpl is expected to unwrap it into things the rest of the system can handle (a bool specifying whether this is an unboxing thunk - like most of crossgen2 is doing). The fact that this is not happening sounds like the bug we should fix instead of introducing a static holding onto type system object. I really wish there was a Roslyn analyzer to block static fields - we should never have statics holding onto type system objects.

Can you please CC crossgen-contrib on crossgen2 changes in the future?

@davidwrighton

davidwrighton commented Apr 27, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

It IS escaping the CorInfoImpl class. I had forgotten about that portion of the design. We should open a bug and fix the problem.

@MichalStrehovskyMichalStrehovsky mentioned this pull request Apr 27, 2020
Closed
@MichalStrehovsky

MichalStrehovsky commented Apr 27, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

We should open a bug and fix the problem.

Filed #35531.

@ghostghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Dec 9, 2020
@davidwrighton
davidwrighton deleted the fix_crossgen2_asserts branch April 20, 2021 17:42
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Reviewers

@trylektrylektrylek approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

area-ReadyToRun

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@davidwrighton@MichalStrehovsky@trylek@Dotnet-GitSync-Bot
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site\n(function() {\n var enabled = true;\n \n function applyDarkMode() {\n if (!enabled) return;\n \n // Create style element if it doesn't exist\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (!style) {\n style = document.createElement('style');\n style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n }\n \n // Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video\n style.textContent = '\n /* Invert everything except media */\n html {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #1a1a2e !important;\n }\n \n /* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */\n img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*=\"background-image\"] {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n }\n \n /* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */\n .no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,\n [data-theme=\"light\"], [data-theme=\"light\"],\n .ace_editor, .ace_editor *,\n .CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,\n .monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,\n .markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,\n .highlight, .highlight *,\n pre code, pre code * {\n filter: none !important;\n }\n \n /* Fix common UI elements */\n .modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #2d2d44 !important;\n border-color: #444 !important;\n }\n \n /* Scrollbars */\n ::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }\n \n /* Selection */\n ::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ';\n }\n \n function removeDarkMode() {\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (style) style.remove();\n }\n \n // Toggle with Alt+Shift+D\n document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {\n if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {\n e.preventDefault();\n enabled = !enabled;\n if (enabled) {\n applyDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');\n } else {\n removeDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');\n }\n }\n });\n \n // Apply on load\n applyDarkMode();\n \n // Re-apply on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {\n applyDarkMode();\n }\n });\n observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });\n \n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');\n})();", "Universal Dark Mode"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); } })(); })();
Skip to content

Fix incorrect behavior noted via asserts - #34842

Merged
trylek merged 1 commit into
dotnet:masterfrom
davidwrighton:fix_crossgen2_asserts
Apr 12, 2020
Merged

Fix incorrect behavior noted via asserts#34842
trylek merged 1 commit into
dotnet:masterfrom
davidwrighton:fix_crossgen2_asserts

Conversation

@davidwrighton

@davidwrightondavidwrighton commented Apr 11, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
  • Multi-thread handling of UnboxingMethodDesc was incorrect. It would result in incorrect caching of fixups to unboxing methods. This would cause asserts and determinism failures.
  • ldtoken of a static method on a valuetype should not refer to an unboxing stub, This is unlikely to cause a failure, but will cause asserts to fire

@davidwrighton
Fix incorrect behavior noted while compiling large aspnet application…
adf86f7
… with debug build of compiler
- Multi-thread handling of UnboxingMethodDesc was incorrect. It would result in incorrect caching of fixups to unboxing methods
- ldtoken of a static method on a valuetype should not refer to an unboxing stub
trylek
trylek approved these changes Apr 12, 2020
View reviewed changes

@trylektrylek left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks great, thanks for fixing!

@trylek
trylek merged commit 8edd202 into dotnet:masterApr 12, 2020
@MichalStrehovsky

MichalStrehovsky commented Apr 20, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Per the comment for the UnboxingMethodDesc:

 /// This class is for internal purposes within the JitInterface. It's not expected
/// for it to escape the JitInterface.

Is this MethodDesc escaping the local CorInfoImpl class?

I don't think the rest of the system is prepared to handle a MethodDesc to an unboxing method. We explicitly designed the type system not to have a unboxing MethodDesc (and @davidwrighton was one of the proponents of that approach). I don't think the rest of the system is prepared to handle seeing it and we really don't want it to escape. We only have unboxing MethodDescs as a local wart so that we can hand something to RyuJIT while compiling a method and it's supposed to go away after.

CorInfoImpl is expected to unwrap it into things the rest of the system can handle (a bool specifying whether this is an unboxing thunk - like most of crossgen2 is doing). The fact that this is not happening sounds like the bug we should fix instead of introducing a static holding onto type system object. I really wish there was a Roslyn analyzer to block static fields - we should never have statics holding onto type system objects.

Can you please CC crossgen-contrib on crossgen2 changes in the future?

@davidwrighton

davidwrighton commented Apr 27, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

It IS escaping the CorInfoImpl class. I had forgotten about that portion of the design. We should open a bug and fix the problem.

@MichalStrehovskyMichalStrehovsky mentioned this pull request Apr 27, 2020
Closed
@MichalStrehovsky

MichalStrehovsky commented Apr 27, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

We should open a bug and fix the problem.

Filed #35531.

@ghostghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Dec 9, 2020
@davidwrighton
davidwrighton deleted the fix_crossgen2_asserts branch April 20, 2021 17:42
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Reviewers

@trylektrylektrylek approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

area-ReadyToRun

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@davidwrighton@MichalStrehovsky@trylek@Dotnet-GitSync-Bot