[pypy-dev] [pypy-commit] pypy default: Hack to ensure that ll_arraycopy gets a proper effectinfo.write_descrs_arrays

[Maciej Fijalkowski]

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 12:00 AM, Hakan Ardo <hakan at debian.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Maciej Fijalkowski <fijall at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 4:38 AM, Hakan Ardo <hakan at debian.org> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:17 PM, Maciej Fijalkowski <fijall at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Hakan Ardo <hakan at debian.org> wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> is there a better way to fix this? The same kind of issue might arise elsewhere?
>>>>
>>>> Make sure that raw_memcopy has the correct effect on analyzer?
>>>
>>> What effect would that be? Setting extraeffect=EF_RANDOM_EFFECTS as it
>>> can write anywhere? Can I then somehow give ll_arraycopy a more
>>> restrictive effectinfo?
>>
>> Armin commited this on trunk: 78fddfb51114
>
> Yes that improves the hack. However it still makes me concerned about
> any other (potential future) usages of raw_memcopy. Wont they have the
> same issue?
>
> How about we set extraeffect=EF_RANDOM_EFFECTS in the effectinfo of
> raw_memcopy and introduces a decorator that would allow us to lessen
> the effect inhertited by a function calling it. Something like:
>
>    def raw_memcopy_effect_in_arraycopy(source, dest, source_start,
> dest_start, length):
>        dest[dest_start] = source[source_start]
>
>    @replace_inherited_effect_of(raw_memcopy,
> with=raw_memcopy_effect_in_arraycopy)
>    def ll_arraycopy(source, dest, source_start, dest_start, length):
>        ...
>        raw_memcopy(...)
>
>
> --
> Håkan Ardö
>

How many usages of raw_memcopy are there? I guess not very many