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
GH-96421: Insert shim frame on entry to interpreter #96319
Conversation
…nt safety checks but ASAN gets tripped up in some cases.
Does this add much extra CPU/stack/memory overhead for calling Python from C? Or alternating py/c/py/c/py calls? Probably not the most important use-cases, but I would hope that they wouldn't pessimize too much. |
|
I have made the requested changes; please review again |
Thanks for making the requested changes! @brandtbucher: please review the changes made to this pull request. |
I don't know if I'll have time to review again today (still need to prepare my talk for the release stream). Is this able to wait until next week? If not, I can try to make time. |
It can wait until next week |
Mostly nits on the changes.
Also, I'd like to discuss this vs. something like #98795 again at our stand-up, if that's okay. This still feels pretty heavy/breaky to me compared to that PR (and I'm still not clear what it actually gives us over that approach).
Misc/NEWS.d/next/Core and Builtins/2022-10-19-15-59-08.gh-issue-96421.e22y3r.rst
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
If you want to schedule another build, you need to add the " |
Just a couple of remaining nits.
I'm not sure what kind of review you're looking for... I don't see any technical issues with the implementation, so I'll hit "approve". :)
But I still have reservations about this change being much deeper (and probably more expensive) than what's really necessary right now. I still feel like I haven't really gotten an answer on why this change is more appropriate than something like #98795. So I don't necessarily approve of this approach, but I also won't block you from merging this if you still feel differently.
Misc/NEWS.d/next/Core and Builtins/2022-10-19-15-59-08.gh-issue-96421.e22y3r.rst
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Brandt Bucher <brandtbucher@gmail.com>
…6319) * Adds EXIT_INTERPRETER instruction to exit PyEval_EvalDefault() * Simplifies RETURN_VALUE, YIELD_VALUE and RETURN_GENERATOR instructions as they no longer need to check for entry frames.
Simplifies
RETURN_VALUE
,RETURN_GENERATOR
andYIELD_VALUE
as they no longer need to check if the current frame is the entry frame.Should allow specialization of
FOR_ITER
andSEND
for generators and coroutines.Needs docs and news.
Performance impact is about zero