Rodrigo Mesquita pushed to branch wip/romes/25636 at Glasgow Haskell Compiler / GHC Commits: d9388e29 by Simon Jakobi at 2026-03-31T13:14:59-04:00 Add regression test for #18177 Closes #18177. Assisted-by: Codex - - - - - 6a10045c by mangoiv at 2026-03-31T13:15:43-04:00 ci: allow metric decrease for two tests on i386 There has been a nightly failure on i386 due to a compiler runtime improvement on i386 debian 12. We allow that. Metric Decrease (test_env='i386-linux-deb12'): T12707 T8095 - - - - - 961a0982 by Rodrigo Mesquita at 2026-04-01T10:29:51+01:00 Add test for #25636 The existing test behaviour of "T23146_liftedeq" changed because the simplifier now does a bit more inlining. We can restore the previous bad behavior by using an OPAQUE pragma. This test doubles as a test for #25636 when run in ghci, so we add it as such. - - - - - c61c070a by Rodrigo Mesquita at 2026-04-01T10:29:51+01:00 refactor: protoBCOName is always a Name Simplifies the code by removing the unnecessary type argument to ProtoBCO which was always 'Name' - - - - - 02fd26e9 by Rodrigo Mesquita at 2026-04-01T10:29:52+01:00 Allocate static constructors for bytecode This commit adds support for static constructors when compiling and linking ByteCode objects. Top-level StgRhsCon get lowered to ProtoStaticCons rather than to ProtoBCOs. A ProtoStaticCon gets allocated directly as a data con application on the heap (using the new primop newConApp#). Previously, we would allocate a ProtoBCO which, when evaluated, would PACK and return the constructor. A few more details are given in Note [Static constructors in Bytecode]. Secondly, this commit also fixes issue #25636 which was caused by linking *unlifted* constructors in BCO instructions as - (1) a thunk indexing the array of BCOs in a module - (2) which evaluated to a BCO which still had to be evaluated to return the unlifted constructor proper. The (2) issue has been resolved by allocating the static constructors directly. The (1) issue can be resolved by ensuring that we allocate all unlifted top-level constructors eagerly, and leave the knot-tying for the lifted BCOs and top-level constructors only. The top-level unlifted constructors are never mutually recursive, so we can allocate them all in one go as long as we do it in topological order. Lifted fields of unlifted constructors can still be filled by the knot-tied lifted variables since in those fields it is fine to keep those thunks. See Note [Tying the knot in createBCOs] for more details. Fixes #25636 - - - - - 6ff610a4 by Rodrigo Mesquita at 2026-04-01T10:29:52+01:00 Revert "StgToByteCode: Assert that PUSH_G'd values are lifted" This reverts commit ec26c54d818e0cd328276196930313f66b780905. Ever since f7a22c0f4e9ae0dc767115d4c53fddbd8372b777, we now do support and will link top-level unlifted constructors into evaluated and properly tagged values which we can reference with PUSH_G. This assertion is no longer true and triggered a failure in T25636 - - - - - b47aec07 by Rodrigo Mesquita at 2026-04-01T10:29:52+01:00 refactor: Tag more remote Ptrs as RemotePtr Pure refactor which improves the API of - GHC.ByteCode.Linker - GHC.Runtime.Interpreter - GHC.Runtime.Interpreter.Types.SymbolCache by using `RemotePtr` for more functions which used to return `Ptr`s that could potentially be in a foreign process. E.g. `lookupIE`, `lookupStaticPtr`, etc... - - - - - dc1fa540 by Rodrigo Mesquita at 2026-04-01T10:29:52+01:00 Add float# and subword tests for #25636 These tests cover that static constructors in bytecode work correctly for Float# and subword values (Word8#, Word16#) - - - - - ced0fe33 by Rodrigo Mesquita at 2026-04-01T10:29:53+01:00 test: Validate topoSort logic in createBCOs This test validates that the topological sorting and ordering of the unlifted constructors and lifted constructors in `createBCOs` is correct. See `Note [Tying the knot in createBCOs]` for why tying the knot for the created BCOs is slightly difficult and why the topological sorting is necessary. This test fails when `let topoSortedObjs = topSortObjs objs` is substituted by `let topoSortedObjs = zip [0..] objs`, thus witnessing the toposort logic is correct and necessary. The test calls the ghci `createBCOs` directly because it is currently impossible to construct in Source Haskell a situation where a top-level static unlifted constructor depends on another (we don't have top-level unlifted constructors except for nullary constructors like `Leaf :: (UTree :: UnliftedType)`). This is another test for fix for #25636 - - - - - 57 changed files: - compiler/GHC/Builtin/primops.txt.pp - compiler/GHC/ByteCode/Asm.hs - compiler/GHC/ByteCode/Binary.hs - compiler/GHC/ByteCode/Instr.hs - compiler/GHC/ByteCode/Linker.hs - compiler/GHC/ByteCode/Types.hs - compiler/GHC/Cmm/Liveness.hs - compiler/GHC/Linker/Loader.hs - compiler/GHC/Runtime/Interpreter.hs - compiler/GHC/Runtime/Interpreter/Types/SymbolCache.hs - compiler/GHC/StgToByteCode.hs - compiler/GHC/StgToCmm/DataCon.hs - compiler/GHC/StgToCmm/Layout.hs - compiler/GHC/StgToCmm/Prim.hs - compiler/GHC/StgToJS/Prim.hs - libraries/ghci/GHCi/CreateBCO.hs - libraries/ghci/GHCi/ResolvedBCO.hs - rts/Interpreter.c - rts/PrimOps.cmm - rts/RtsSymbols.c - rts/include/Rts.h - rts/include/rts/storage/ClosureMacros.h - rts/include/stg/MiscClosures.h - testsuite/tests/codeGen/should_run/T23146/T23146_liftedeq.hs - + testsuite/tests/codeGen/should_run/T23146/T25636.script - + testsuite/tests/codeGen/should_run/T23146/T25636.stdout - testsuite/tests/codeGen/should_run/T23146/all.T - + testsuite/tests/codeGen/should_run/T25636a/T25636a.script - + testsuite/tests/codeGen/should_run/T25636a/T25636a.stdout - + testsuite/tests/codeGen/should_run/T25636a/all.T - + testsuite/tests/codeGen/should_run/T25636b/T25636b.script - + testsuite/tests/codeGen/should_run/T25636b/T25636b.stdout - + testsuite/tests/codeGen/should_run/T25636b/all.T - + testsuite/tests/codeGen/should_run/T25636c/T25636c.script - + testsuite/tests/codeGen/should_run/T25636c/T25636c.stdout - + testsuite/tests/codeGen/should_run/T25636c/all.T - + testsuite/tests/codeGen/should_run/T25636d/T25636d.script - + testsuite/tests/codeGen/should_run/T25636d/T25636d.stdout - + testsuite/tests/codeGen/should_run/T25636d/all.T - + testsuite/tests/codeGen/should_run/T25636e/T25636e.script - + testsuite/tests/codeGen/should_run/T25636e/T25636e.stdout - + testsuite/tests/codeGen/should_run/T25636e/all.T - + testsuite/tests/driver/T18177.hs - testsuite/tests/driver/all.T - testsuite/tests/ghci.debugger/scripts/print034.stdout - + testsuite/tests/ghci/should_run/T25636f.hs - + testsuite/tests/ghci/should_run/T25636f.stdout - testsuite/tests/ghci/should_run/all.T - testsuite/tests/interface-stability/base-exports.stdout - testsuite/tests/interface-stability/base-exports.stdout-javascript-unknown-ghcjs - testsuite/tests/interface-stability/base-exports.stdout-mingw32 - testsuite/tests/interface-stability/base-exports.stdout-ws-32 - testsuite/tests/interface-stability/ghc-experimental-exports.stdout - testsuite/tests/interface-stability/ghc-experimental-exports.stdout-mingw32 - testsuite/tests/interface-stability/ghc-prim-exports.stdout - testsuite/tests/interface-stability/ghc-prim-exports.stdout-mingw32 - utils/deriveConstants/Main.hs The diff was not included because it is too large. View it on GitLab: https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/compare/50aa3bf8f33f28af0f032f09eb050f5... -- View it on GitLab: https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/compare/50aa3bf8f33f28af0f032f09eb050f5... You're receiving this email because of your account on gitlab.haskell.org.