about summary refs log tree commit diff stats
path: root/036refcount.cc
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAgeFilesLines
* 3300Kartik K. Agaram2016-09-061-1/+2
|
* 3256Kartik K. Agaram2016-08-261-1/+2
| | | | | Bugfix in filesystem creation. I'm sure there are other fake-filesystem bugs.
* 3212 - bugfix in refcount managementKartik K. Agaram2016-08-171-27/+75
| | | | | | | | | | | When updating refcounts for a typed segment of memory being copied over with another, we were only ever using the new copy's data to determine any tags for exclusive containers. Looks like the right way to do refcounts is to increment and decrement separately. Hopefully this is a complete fix for the intermittent but non-deterministic errors we've been encountering while running the edit/ app.
* 3211Kartik K. Agaram2016-08-171-1/+1
|
* 3209Kartik K. Agaram2016-08-171-1/+1
|
* 3208Kartik K. Agaram2016-08-161-28/+12
|
* 3207Kartik K. Agaram2016-08-161-0/+17
|
* 3206Kartik K. Agaram2016-08-161-1/+1
|
* 3205Kartik K. Agaram2016-08-161-13/+13
|
* 3202 - bugfix: 'start-running' and refcountsKartik K. Agaram2016-08-161-4/+10
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | When you pass an ingredient to a recipe using 'start-running' it mostly behaves identically to performing a regular function call. However, if the calling function completed before the new routine had a chance to run, the ingredients passed in ran the risk of being reclaimed. In response, let's always increment refcounts at the time of a function call rather than when the ingredients are read inside the callee. Now the summary of commit 3197 is modified to this: Update refcounts of products after every instruction, EXCEPT: a) when instruction is a non-primitive and the callee starts with 'local-scope' (because it's already not decremented in 'return') OR: b) when instruction is primitive 'next-ingredient' or 'next-ingredient-without-typechecking'
* 3199Kartik K. Agaram2016-08-161-6/+4
| | | | | | | | | Never mind, just close your nose and replace that function parameter with a global variable. This may not always be the solution for the problem of layers being unable to add parameters and arguments, but here it works well and it's unclear what problems the global might cause.
* 3197Kartik K. Agaram2016-08-161-2/+2
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Replace an integer with a boolean across two layers of function calls. It has long been one of the ugliest consequences of my approach with layers that functions might need to be introduced with unnecessary arguments simply because we have no clean way to add parameters to a function definition after the fact -- or to add the default argument corresponding to that parameter in calls. This problem is exacerbated by the redundant argument having to be passed in through multiple layers of functions. In this instance: In layer 20 we define write_memory with an argument called 'saving_instruction_products' which isn't used yet. In layer 36 we reveal that we use this argument in a call to should_update_refcounts_in_write_memory() -- where it is again not used yet. Layer 43 finally clarifies what we're shooting for: a) In general when we need to update some memory, we always want to update refcounts. b) The only exception is when we're reclaiming locals in a function that set up its stack frame using 'local-scope' (signalling that it wants immediate reclamation). At that point we avoid decrementing refcounts of 'escaping' addresses that are being returned, and we also avoid incrementing refcounts of products in the caller instruction. The latter case is basically why we need this boolean and its dance across 3 layers. In summary, write_memory() needs to update refcounts except if: we're writing products for an instruction, the instruction is not a primitive, and the (callee) recipe for the instruction starts with 'local-scope'.
* 3190Kartik K. Agaram2016-08-161-2/+7
| | | | | | | | | | | | I'm seeing *extremely* rare crashes due to some problem with negative refcounts in the edit/ app. It's not using any concurrency at all, so that's not the issue. Setting a tripwire to try and catch it. I'm going to run: mu --trace edit ..all the time for a while. And periodically restart when the trace makes the program too sluggish to continue.
* 3124Kartik K. Agaram2016-07-221-1/+0
| | | | | Reorganize data structure for lambda cells. Create our first real unit test for the compiler in the process.
* 3059Kartik K. Agaram2016-06-171-0/+2
|
* 3047 - fix another hole in refcount managementKartik K. Agaram2016-06-111-26/+56
| | | | | | This wouldn't have failed silently; I have that fig leaf. If someone had tried to copy an exclusive container containing an exclusive container containing an address Mu would have crashed on them.
* 3045 - generalize core refcounting data structureKartik K. Agaram2016-06-111-24/+67
|
* 3044Kartik K. Agaram2016-06-111-0/+1
|
* 3043Kartik K. Agaram2016-06-101-18/+9
|
* 3042Kartik K. Agaram2016-06-101-2/+2
|
* 3018Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-261-5/+2
|
* 2973 - reclaim refcounts for local scopes againKartik K. Agaram2016-05-181-6/+14
| | | | | | More thorough redo of commit 2767 (Mar 12), which was undone in commit 2810 (Mar 24). It's been a long slog. Next step: write a bunch of mu code in the edit/ app in search of bugs.
* 2972 - abandon recursive containersKartik K. Agaram2016-05-171-8/+14
|
* 2968Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-171-14/+37
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | More reorganization in preparation for implementing recursive abandon(). Refcounts are getting incredibly hairy. I need to juggle containers containing other containers, and containers *pointing* to other containers. For a while I considered getting rid of address_element_info entirely and just going by types for every single update_refcount. But that's definitely more work, and it's unclear that things will be cleaner/shorter/simpler. I haven't measured the speedup, but it seems worth optimizing every pointer copy to make sure we aren't manipulating types at runtime. The key insight now is a) to continue to compute information about nested containers at load time, because that's the common case when updating refcounts, but b) to compute information about *pointed* values at run-time, because that's the uncommon case. As a result, we're going to cheat in the interpreter and use type information at runtime just for abandon(), just because the corresponding task when we get to a compiler will be radically different. It will still be tractable, though.
* 2966Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-171-6/+3
|
* 2965 - update refcounts when copying containersKartik K. Agaram2016-05-151-47/+131
| | | | | | This is hopefully quite thorough. I handle nested containers, as well as exclusive containers that might contain addresses only when the tag has a specific value.
* 2963Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-151-38/+42
| | | | | | To support exclusive containers a recursive answer will be easier to reuse than the current iterative one. First step: figure out the precise boundary and interface of the recursive function.
* 2962Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-151-0/+3
|
* 2961Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-151-2/+2
|
* 2960Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-151-7/+7
| | | | First genuine Travis CI failure fixed! May there be many more.
* 2959Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-141-7/+71
|
* 2958Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-141-1/+30
|
* 2957Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-141-8/+57
|
* 2956Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-141-3/+7
|
* 2955 - back to more refcount housekeepingKartik K. Agaram2016-05-121-0/+108
| | | | | Update refcounts of address elements when copying containers. Still lots to do; see todo list at end of 036refcount.cc.
* 2934 - all layers running againKartik K. Agaram2016-05-071-2/+2
| | | | | | Since I switched to a Mac laptop (commit 2725) I've been lax in running test_all_layers because I have to ssh into a server and whatnot. I should just get CI setup somewhere..
* 2933Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-061-1/+1
| | | | Can't believe I didn't run tests after 2932.
* 2931 - be explicit about making copiesKartik K. Agaram2016-05-061-2/+2
|
* 2923Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-041-3/+0
|
* 2922Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-041-28/+34
| | | | | | | | | A better primitive: manage refcounts for an assignment without actually doing the assignment itself. This way we can add refcounts as a new, independent bit of bookkeeping without littering early returns and duplicate code paths. (OCD: commit number.)
* 2898 - start filling in missing refcountsKartik K. Agaram2016-05-031-6/+91
| | | | | | | This commit covers instructions 'put', 'put-index' and 'maybe-convert'. Next up are the harder ones: 'copy' and 'merge'. In these cases there's a non-scalar being copied, and we need to figure out which locations within it need to update their refcount.
* 2897Kartik K. Agaram2016-05-031-0/+74