Skip to content

restore / rewrite various tests #4920

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

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Feb 3, 2016
Merged

Conversation

lrytz
Copy link
Member

@lrytz lrytz commented Jan 27, 2016

separate commits to simplify reviewing, will squash before merging.

when were these tests disabled?

@scala-jenkins scala-jenkins added this to the 2.12.0-M4 milestone Jan 27, 2016
@lrytz lrytz force-pushed the oldOptimizerTests branch from 67b9115 to 48d895e Compare January 27, 2016 18:19
@lrytz
Copy link
Member Author

lrytz commented Jan 27, 2016

The commit "Improve simplifyJumps" (80043c7) is review by @retronym.

For the others, @soc, would you lend a hand?

As mentioned above, I'll squash things into 2 commits after reviewing.

@lrytz lrytz force-pushed the oldOptimizerTests branch from 48d895e to 3f0bf25 Compare January 27, 2016 19:30
@retronym
Copy link
Member

LGTM

@soc
Copy link
Contributor

soc commented Jan 31, 2016

LGTM!

@retronym
Copy link
Member

retronym commented Feb 1, 2016

I've looked through these and it all seems to be faithfully restored. Will look GTM after the squash.

@lrytz lrytz force-pushed the oldOptimizerTests branch from 3f0bf25 to 03cd2b8 Compare February 3, 2016 11:03
@lrytz lrytz changed the title restore / rewrite various tests [ci: last-only] restore / rewrite various tests Feb 3, 2016
lrytz added 4 commits February 3, 2016 12:04
Improve simplifyJumps to rewrite

  IFEQ L4
  L5
  GOTO L6

to

  IFNE L6
  L5

This rewrite is only correct if L5 is not the target of any jump
instruction (otherwise, removing the GOTO would change semantics).
Previously we did not do the rewrite if there was any label between
the conditional jump and the goto (like L5). Now we track which labels
are jump targets.
Rewrite tests for new optimizer
  - SI-6941
  - SI-2171
  - t3430
  - t3252
  - t4840
  - t2171
  - t3430
  - t3252
  - t6157
  - t6547
  - t8062
  - t8306
  - t8359
  - t9123
  - trait-force-info
  - private-inline

test cases for bugs fixed in the new optimizer
  - SI-9160, the unnecessary boxing mentioned in the ticket is optimzied
    since push-pop elimination (scala#4858).
  - SI-8796
  - SI-8524
  - SI-7807

fix flags file for t3420

remove an empty flags file

remove unnecessary partest filters

explicit inliner warnings in test t7582

Restore the lisp test. Removing the flags file - our build runs with the
(new) optimizer enabled anyway.

The test spent the past few years as an optimizer test in pos/
see https://issues.scala-lang.org/browse/SI-4512. The attempt may fail,
but why not give it a try.

$ git lg -S"lisp"

...
| * | | | f785785 - SI-4579 Yoke the power of lisp.scala as a stress for the optimizer. (3 years, 8 months ago) <Jason Zaugg>
...
* | | | | | | 622cc99 - Revert the lisp test. (3 years, 10 months ago) <Paul Phillips>
...
* | | | | | | 97f0324 - Revived the lisp test. (3 years, 10 months ago) <Paul Phillips>
...
* | 1e0f7dc - Imprison the lisp test, no review. (4 years, 4 months ago) <Paul Phillips>
...
* | 6b09630 - "Freed the lisp test." Tweaked partest defaults... (4 years, 6 months ago) <Paul Phillips>
...
* | fec42c1 - Lisp test wins again, no review. (4 years, 8 months ago) <Paul Phillips>
...
* | 1c2d44d - Restored the lisp.scala test. (4 years, 8 months ago) <Paul Phillips>
...
* | 15ed892 - Temporarily sending lisp.scala to be interprete... (4 years, 8 months ago) <Paul Phillips>
...
@lrytz lrytz force-pushed the oldOptimizerTests branch from 03cd2b8 to 4af9f15 Compare February 3, 2016 11:05
@lrytz
Copy link
Member Author

lrytz commented Feb 3, 2016

squashed

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants