Skip to content
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

JIT: make non-null assertions about all indir addr types #113772

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

AndyAyersMS
Copy link
Member

Instead of just GC types. This removes some gratuitous diffs when escape analysis can retype a ref or byref to long.

Also remove obsolete (?) block for TYP_LONG assertions.

Instead of just GC types. This removes some gratuitous diffs
when escape analysis can retype a ref or byref to long.

Also remove obsolete (?) block for TYP_LONG assertions.
@Copilot Copilot bot review requested due to automatic review settings March 21, 2025 21:05

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Copilot wasn't able to review any files in this pull request.

Files not reviewed (1)
  • src/coreclr/jit/assertionprop.cpp: Language not supported
@dotnet-issue-labeler dotnet-issue-labeler bot added the area-CodeGen-coreclr CLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI label Mar 21, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

Tagging subscribers to this area: @JulieLeeMSFT, @jakobbotsch
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

@AndyAyersMS
Copy link
Member Author

@EgorBo PTAL
cc @dotnet/jit-contrib

Some diffs expected -- null checks removed (improvements), large constants propped (regressions).

@EgorBo
Copy link
Member

EgorBo commented Mar 21, 2025

Let's see the diffs, last time I tried, it was mostly just a TP regression. Perhaps, things changed since then

@AndyAyersMS
Copy link
Member Author

Let's see the diffs, last time I tried, it was mostly just a TP regression. Perhaps, things changed since then

I will need something like this to avoid regressions when more escape analysis comes online.

Copy link
Member

@EgorBo EgorBo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM assuming CI failures aren't related

@AndyAyersMS
Copy link
Member Author

Diffs

Not sure what to make of the failures yet. arm64 seems like a CI issue, arm ..??

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area-CodeGen-coreclr CLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants