July 2016 - ghc-devs - Haskell.org

Cross-compiling Template Haskell via -fexternal-interpreter and IPC
by Alberto Valverde 30 May '17

30 May '17

Hello, I'm trying to put together a GHC 8.0.1 cross-compiler with Template Haskell support. Initially to target Windows (32bits) from a Linux host but a similar procedure should enable to target other platforms too. I'd like to contribute the patches back so I'm asking for advice on how to implement it in order to increase the chances of them being accepted. I've managed to get a working stage 1 cross-compiler with some patches which correctly builds all stage1 libs and GHC + stage 2 compiler and ghc-iserv.exe. However, compiling TH by using wine and ghc-iserver.exe fails because the file descriptor ids that GHC passes as arguments to "wine ghc-iserv.exe" don't make sense in the emulated windows world. I've hacked around this to test the feasibility of the approach by using stdin/stdout instead of creating new pipes and, surprisingly, managed to cross-compile a simple Template Haskell program. I'm considering using a socket for communicating between both processes as a more permanent solution but this would incur in a dependency on the "network" package. Would this be acceptable? Named pipes have also crossed my mind but I'm not sure how well they're supported by wine. Thanks for your attention. Alberto P.S: Code is in the "cross-mingw-hacks" branches of these repositories and is based on the ghc-8.0.1-release tag: https://github.com/albertov/ghc https://github.com/albertov/hsc2hs A Docker image script here that builds it is here: https://github.com/albertov/ghc-cross-compiler-windows-x86

6 11

GHC 8.0.1-rc4 source tarball availability
by Ben Gamari 14 May '17

14 May '17

tl;dr: If you would like to produce a binary distribution for GHC 8.0.1-rc4 then let us know, grab the source distribution and start building. The binary distributions will be all released one week from today. Hello GHC packagers, I am happy to announce the release of the 8.0.1-rc4 source distribution to binary packagers. This release should resolve all of the issues noted in the release candidate 3 announcement. You will find the usual artifacts at http://downloads.haskell.org/~ghc/8.0.1-rc4/ For this candidate we are again following our new release policy [1], with a one-week delay between the release of the source and binary distributions. The goal of this policy is to give all platforms the opportunity for support from the first day of a release. If all of the expected binary releases are submitted before the week-long delay has elapsed, we will move forward with the release of the binaries on an accelerated schedule. It would be appreciated if you could reply to this message confirming that you intend to offer a binary distribution this release. Otherwise, let either Austin or I know if you have any trouble building your distribution. I have yet to push the ghc-8.0.1-rc4 tag in case we encounter unexpected issues but all of my builds with this tarball thusfar have gone quite well. Good luck and thanks for all of your work! Cheers, - Ben [1] https://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/2016-March/011546.html

12 75

Improving trac notifications
by Matthew Pickering 12 Feb '17

12 Feb '17

I subscribe to the ghc-tickets[1] mailing list which provides updates to all trac tickets. This is very useful, however when a ticket description is updated the whole description is included in the email which makes it hard to see what actually changed. The web interface shows a nice diff[2] of the changes, I think it would be good if emails could also include a diff rather than the current quite useless output. After a bit of investigation, it appears that the easiest way to achieve this is apply a simple patch to our copy of trac. The current format is hard coded on line 558 in this module, it seems easy to modify this section to instead provide a diff. http://www.edgewall.org/docs/trac-trunk/epydoc/trac.ticket.notification-pys… There is also already a module which has the diff operations implemented which could be used. http://www.edgewall.org/docs/trac-trunk/epydoc/trac.versioncontrol.diff-mod… Another option would be to use something like the `AnnouncerPlugin`[3] but that seems like much more work and would still require someone to write a custom formatter. Any thoughts? Matt [1]: https://mail.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-tickets [2]: https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/10873?action=diff&version=6 [3]: https://trac-hacks.org/wiki/AnnouncerPlugin

3 8

timings for individual compiler passes (in rc3)
by Johannes Waldmann 07 Dec '16

07 Dec '16

Hi. There is this (closed) https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/11653 and it's landed in 8.rc3. Thats good, and I want to make an effort to use this. But how? Just "-v2"? This gives a lot of noise. And no summary? Automatic analysis (of the output text stream, by external program) could be somewhat easier if each data set (starting at "\n!!!") did occupy exactly one line (currently, line breaks do occur). Anyway, what do I look for? Any large or suspicious number - but what exactly is "suspicious"? Anything above 1 second? Are we to believe the assignment of cost to pass, or could there be mis-attribution because result of an earlier pass is only forced later? Oh, and where do you want discussion of this feature (mailing list, ticket, ...)? I do hope that it will prove useful, in the sense that it could allow non-developers like me, or even build bots, to help spot performance problems. (E.g., you could advertise to enable this on travis. Yes, their build times depend on a lot of things, but still.) - J.W.

3 6

RE: vectorisation code?
by Simon Peyton Jones 12 Sep '16

12 Sep '16

Austin, (or anyone else) Manuel says: | > Would it be ok if we left it in the repo, but CPP'd it out so that | we | > didn't compile everything? (The DPH library is in the same state at | > the moment.) | > | > It might suffer bit-rot, but it’d still be there for resurrection. | | Sure, that’s ok. Could you action this? Just avoid compiling anything in 'vectorise/', using (I suppose) cpp to create a stub where necessary. Leave enough comments to explain! Simon | | I hope everything is fine in Cambridge! | Manuel | | > | -----Original Message----- | > | From: ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-bounces@haskell.org] On Behalf Of | > | Manuel M T Chakravarty | > | Sent: 16 January 2015 02:58 | > | To: Richard Eisenberg | > | Cc: ghc-devs(a)haskell.org Devs | > | Subject: Re: vectorisation code? | > | | > | [Sorry, sent from the wrong account at first.] | > | | > | We currently don’t have the resources to work on DPH. I would | > | obviously prefer to leave the code in, in the hope that we will be | > | able to return to it. | > | | > | Manuel | > | | > | > Richard Eisenberg <eir(a)cis.upenn.edu>: | > | > | > | > Hi devs, | > | > | > | > There's a sizable number of modules in the `vectorise` | > | subdirectory of GHC. I'm sure these do all sorts of wonderful | > | things. But what, exactly? And, does anyone make use of these | wonderful things? | > | > | > | > A quick poking through the code shows a tiny link between the | > | vectorise code and the rest of GHC -- the function `vectorise` | > | exported from the module `Vectorise`, which is named in exactly | one | > | place from SimplCore. From what I can tell, the function will be | > | called only when `-fvectorise` is specified, and then it seems to | > | interact with a {-# VECTORISE #-} pragma. However, `{-# VECTORISE | > | #-}` doesn't appear in the manual at all, and `-fvectorise` is | > | given only a cursory explanation. It seems these work with DPH... | > | which has been disabled, no? Searching online finds several hits, | > | but nothing more recent than 2012. | > | > | > | > I hope this question doesn't offend -- it seems that | > | vectorisation probably has amazing performance gains. Yet, the | > | feature also seems unloved. In the meantime, compiling (and | > | recompiling, and | > | recompiling...) the modules takes time, as does going through | them | > | to propagate changes from elsewhere. If this feature is truly | > | orphaned, unloved, and unused at the moment, is it reasonable to | > | consider putting it on furlough? | > | > | > | > Thanks, | > | > Richard | > | > _______________________________________________ | > | > ghc-devs mailing list | > | > ghc-devs(a)haskell.org | > | > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs | > | | > | _______________________________________________ | > | ghc-devs mailing list | > | ghc-devs(a)haskell.org | > | http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

13 35

Moving ArgumentsDo forward
by Akio Takano 22 Aug '16

22 Aug '16

Hi, Ticket #10843 [0] proposes an extension, ArgumentsDo, which I would love to see in GHC. It's a small syntactic extension that allows do, case, if and lambda blocks as function arguments, without parentheses. However, its differential revision [1] has been abandoned, citing a mixed response from the community. A message [2] on the ticket summarizes a thread in haskell-cafe on this topic. I, for one, think adding this extension is worthwhile, because a significant number of people support it. Also, given how some people seem to feel ambivalent about this change, I believe actually allowing people to try it makes it clearer whether it is a good idea. Thus I'm wondering: is there any chance that this gets merged? If so, I'm willing to work on whatever is remaining to get the change merged. Regards, Takano Akio [0]: https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/10843 [1]: https://phabricator.haskell.org/D1219 [2]: https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/10843#comment:12

7 11

Request for feedback: deriving strategies syntax
by Ryan Scott 18 Aug '16

18 Aug '16

I'm pursuing a fix to Trac #10598 [1], an issue in which GHC users do not have fine-grained control over which strategy to use when deriving an instance, especially when multiple extensions like -XGeneralizedNewtypeDeriving and -XDeriveAnyClass are enabled simultaneously. I have a working patch up at [2] which would fix the issue, but there's still a lingering question of what the right syntax is to use here. I want to make sure I get this right, so I'm requesting input from the community. To condense the conversation in [1], there are three means by which you can derive an instance in GHC today: 1. -XGeneralizedNewtypeDeriving 2. -XDeriveAnyClass 3. GHC's builtin algorithms (which are used for deriving Eq, Show, Functor, Generic, Data, etc.) The problem is that it's sometimes hard to know which of the three will kick in when you say `deriving C`. To resolve this ambiguity, I want to introduce the -XDerivingStrategies extension, where a user can explicitly request which of the above ways to derive an instance. Here are some of the previously proposed syntaxes for this feature, with their perceived pros and cons: ----- Pragmas * Examples: - newtype T a = T a deriving ({-# BUILTIN #-} Eq, {-# GND #-} Ord, {-# DAC #-} Read, Show) - deriving {-# BUILTIN #-} instance Functor T * Pros: - Backwards compatible - Requires no changes to Template Haskell * Cons: - Unlike other pragmas, these ones can affect the semantics of a program ----- Type synonyms * Examples: - newtype T a = T a deriving (Builtin Eq, GND Ord, DAC Read, Show) - deriving instance Builtin (Functor T) * Pros: - Requires no Template Haskell or parser changes, just some magic in the typechecker - Backwards compatible (back to GHC 7.6) * Cons: - Some developers objected to the idea of imbuing type synonyms with magical properties ----- Multiple deriving clauses, plus new keywords * Examples: - newtype T a = T a deriving Show deriving builtin instance (Eq, Foldable) deriving newtype instance Ord deriving anyclass instance Read - deriving builtin instance Functor T * Pros: - Doesn't suffer from the same semantic issues as the other suggestions - (Arguably) the most straightforward-looking syntax * Cons: - Requires breaking changes to Template Haskell - Changes the parser and syntax significantly Several GHC devs objected to the first two of the above suggestions in [1], so I chose to implement the "Multiple deriving clauses, plus new keywords" option in [2]. However, I'd appreciate further discussion on the above options, which one you prefer, and if you have other suggestions for syntax to use. Ryan S. ----- [1] https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/10598 [2] https://phabricator.haskell.org/D2280

15 29

Harbourmaster is still not building diffs
by Matthew Pickering 13 Aug '16

13 Aug '16

Since a couple of months ago, harbourmaster no longer builds diffs. This is quite a large barrier to entry for new contributors as running ./validate takes a long time. It seems to be a very low priority issue to get it back working. Are there plans to get harbourmaster to build diffs again? Matt

2 2

macOS 10.12
by Manuel M T Chakravarty 29 Jul '16

29 Jul '16

Has anybody tried compiling GHC with the (beta) macOS 10.12 Sierra SDK? I just gave it a shot trying to compile GHC 7.8.3 and ran into a problem with GetTime.c in the RTS. (I haven’t tried GHC 8.0.1.) Manuel

3 4

Re: atomicModifyMutVar#: cas() is not inlined
by Ömer Sinan Ağacan 27 Jul '16

27 Jul '16

To keep this thread up-to-date: https://phabricator.haskell.org/D2431 2016-07-27 14:08 GMT+00:00 Alex Biehl <alex.biehl(a)gmail.com>: > There already is the CallishMachOp MO_cmpxchg in > https://github.com/ghc/ghc/blob/5d98b8bf249fab9bb0be6c5d4e8ddd4578994abb/co… > > All is left todo would be to add it to CmmParse.y (which has a TODO comment > https://github.com/ghc/ghc/blob/714bebff44076061d0a719c4eda2cfd213b7ac3d/co…) > then you could use that instead of the ccall. > > Ömer Sinan Ağacan <omeragacan(a)gmail.com> schrieb am Mi., 27. Juli 2016 um > 11:15 Uhr: >> >> This is from definition of stg_atomicModifyMutVarzh(): (for threaded >> runtime) >> >> retry: >> x = StgMutVar_var(mv); >> StgThunk_payload(z,1) = x; >> (h) = ccall cas(mv + SIZEOF_StgHeader + OFFSET_StgMutVar_var, x, y); >> if (h != x) { goto retry; } >> >> cas() is defined in includes/stg/SMP.h like this: >> >> EXTERN_INLINE StgWord >> cas(StgVolatilePtr p, StgWord o, StgWord n) >> { >> return __sync_val_compare_and_swap(p, o, n); >> } >> >> I think this is a function we want to make sure to inline everywhere, >> right? >> It's compiled to a single instruction on my x86_64 Linux laptop. >> >> >>> disassemble cas >> Dump of assembler code for function cas: >> 0x0000000000027240 <+0>: mov %rsi,%rax >> 0x0000000000027243 <+3>: lock cmpxchg %rdx,(%rdi) >> 0x0000000000027248 <+8>: retq >> End of assembler dump. >> >> But it seems like it's not really inlined in Cmm functions: >> >> >>> disassemble stg_atomicModifyMutVarzh >> Dump of assembler code for function stg_atomicModifyMutVarzh: >> ... >> 0x0000000000046738 <+120>: callq 0x27240 <cas> >> ... >> End of assembler dump. >> >> I guess the problem is that we can't inline C code in Cmm, but I was >> wondering >> if this is important enough to try to fix maybe. Has anyone here looked at >> some >> profiling info to see how much time spent on this cas() call when threads >> are >> blocked in `atomicModifyIORef` etc? >> _______________________________________________ >> ghc-devs mailing list >> ghc-devs(a)haskell.org >> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

1 0