Skip to content

Remove "inline" from library models [blocks: #6863] #6901

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
Jun 3, 2022

Conversation

tautschnig
Copy link
Collaborator

It nowadays has no effect for we don't do partial inlining by default
anymore. It does, however, trip up the library check on Ubuntu 22.04 as
fopen, fclose, fdopen are marked with attribute "noinline" in the system
library.

Please review commit-by-commit: the second one is clang-format provided re-formatting only.

  • Each commit message has a non-empty body, explaining why the change was made.
  • n/a Methods or procedures I have added are documented, following the guidelines provided in CODING_STANDARD.md.
  • n/a The feature or user visible behaviour I have added or modified has been documented in the User Guide in doc/cprover-manual/
  • Regression or unit tests are included, or existing tests cover the modified code (in this case I have detailed which ones those are in the commit message).
  • n/a My commit message includes data points confirming performance improvements (if claimed).
  • My PR is restricted to a single feature or bugfix.
  • White-space or formatting changes outside the feature-related changed lines are in commits of their own.

@tautschnig tautschnig changed the title Remove "inline" from library models Remove "inline" from library models [blocks: #6863] Jun 1, 2022
@tautschnig tautschnig self-assigned this Jun 1, 2022
@tautschnig tautschnig force-pushed the bugfixes/library-no-inline branch from 8001f89 to d349380 Compare June 2, 2022 09:11
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 2, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #6901 (d349380) into develop (577b0ec) will increase coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 90.19%.

❗ Current head d349380 differs from pull request most recent head 4057726. Consider uploading reports for the commit 4057726 to get more accurate results

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #6901   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    77.81%   77.82%           
========================================
  Files         1568     1568           
  Lines       179975   180004   +29     
========================================
+ Hits        140044   140081   +37     
+ Misses       39931    39923    -8     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
.../goto-instrument/goto_instrument_parse_options.cpp 70.90% <73.33%> (-0.23%) ⬇️
src/ansi-c/c_typecheck_base.cpp 81.15% <95.23%> (+2.27%) ⬆️
src/ansi-c/goto_check_c.cpp 91.55% <100.00%> (+0.07%) ⬆️
src/goto-symex/symex_target_equation.cpp 95.35% <100.00%> (+0.02%) ⬆️
src/goto-programs/goto_inline_class.cpp 85.08% <0.00%> (-3.04%) ⬇️
src/ansi-c/expr2c.cpp 67.53% <0.00%> (-0.10%) ⬇️
src/solvers/smt2/smt2_conv.cpp 67.61% <0.00%> (+0.35%) ⬆️
...olvers/flattening/c_bit_field_replacement_type.cpp 100.00% <0.00%> (+46.66%) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update aad7825...4057726. Read the comment docs.

Avoid unnecessary warnings about malloc not being declared. The
resulting type conflict may also trip up the analysis, and is only
worked around by inlining calls to malloc.
Instead, add the missing _mm_adds_epu16.
It nowadays has no effect for we don't do partial inlining by default
anymore. It does, however, trip up the library check on Ubuntu 22.04 as
fopen, fclose, fdopen are marked with attribute "noinline" in the system
library.

The only exception is goto-analyzer, which still does partial inlining.
Therefore, keep "malloc" marked "inline" to ensure the analyses do not
need to track allocations across functions. The full fix, however, is
for goto-analyzer to selectively do inlining.
@tautschnig tautschnig force-pushed the bugfixes/library-no-inline branch from d349380 to 4057726 Compare June 3, 2022 21:37
@tautschnig tautschnig merged commit 65d3c00 into diffblue:develop Jun 3, 2022
@tautschnig tautschnig deleted the bugfixes/library-no-inline branch June 3, 2022 22:36
tautschnig added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 4, 2022
GitHub actions: Ubuntu 22.04 [depends-on: #6901]
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants