[#61171] Re: [ruby-changes:33145] normal:r45224 (trunk): gc.c: fix build for testing w/o RGenGC — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
(2014/03/01 16:15), normal wrote:
3 messages
2014/03/01
[#61243] [ruby-trunk - Feature #9425] [PATCH] st: use power-of-two sizes to avoid slow modulo ops — normalperson@...
Issue #9425 has been updated by Eric Wong.
4 messages
2014/03/03
[#61359] [ruby-trunk - Bug #9609] [Open] [PATCH] vm_eval.c: fix misplaced RB_GC_GUARDs — normalperson@...
Issue #9609 has been reported by Eric Wong.
5 messages
2014/03/07
[#61360] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #9609] [Open] [PATCH] vm_eval.c: fix misplaced RB_GC_GUARDs
— SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
2014/03/07
(2014/03/07 19:09), normalperson@yhbt.net wrote:
[#61362] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #9609] [Open] [PATCH] vm_eval.c: fix misplaced RB_GC_GUARDs
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2014/03/07
SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
[#61424] [REJECT?] xmalloc/xfree: reduce atomic ops w/ thread-locals — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
I'm unsure about this. I _hate_ the extra branches this adds;
13 messages
2014/03/12
[#61466] Re: [REJECT?] xmalloc/xfree: reduce atomic ops w/ thread-locals
— SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
2014/03/13
Hi Eric,
[#61471] Re: [REJECT?] xmalloc/xfree: reduce atomic ops w/ thread-locals
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2014/03/13
SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
[#61508] Re: [REJECT?] xmalloc/xfree: reduce atomic ops w/ thread-locals
— SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
2014/03/15
(2014/03/14 2:12), Eric Wong wrote:
[#61509] Re: [REJECT?] xmalloc/xfree: reduce atomic ops w/ thread-locals
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2014/03/15
SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
[#61452] [ruby-trunk - Feature #9632] [Open] [PATCH 0/2] speedup IO#close with linked-list from ccan — normalperson@...
Issue #9632 has been reported by Eric Wong.
3 messages
2014/03/13
[#61496] [ruby-trunk - Feature #9638] [Open] [PATCH] limit IDs to 32-bits on 64-bit systems — normalperson@...
Issue #9638 has been reported by Eric Wong.
4 messages
2014/03/14
[#61568] hash function for global method cache — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
I came upon this because I noticed existing st numtable worked poorly
7 messages
2014/03/17
[#61605] Re: hash function for global method cache
— SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
2014/03/20
(2014/03/18 8:03), Eric Wong wrote:
[#61606] Re: hash function for global method cache
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2014/03/20
SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
[#61631] Re: hash function for global method cache
— =?KOI8-R?B?4NLJyiDzz8vPzM/X?= <funny.falcon@...>
2014/03/22
what's the profit from using binary tree in place of hash?
[#61632] Re: hash function for global method cache
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2014/03/22
Юрий Соколов <funny.falcon@gmail.com> wrote:
[#61687] [ruby-trunk - Bug #9606] Ocassional SIGSEGV inTestException#test_machine_stackoverflow on OpenBSD — normalperson@...
Issue #9606 has been updated by Eric Wong.
3 messages
2014/03/26
[#61760] [ruby-trunk - Feature #9632] [PATCH 0/2] speedup IO#close with linked-list from ccan — normalperson@...
Issue #9632 has been updated by Eric Wong.
3 messages
2014/03/30
[ruby-core:61769] [ruby-trunk - Bug #9321] rb_mod_const_missing does not generate a c-return event
From:
deivid.rodriguez@...
Date:
2014-03-30 16:32:55 UTC
List:
ruby-core #61769
Issue #9321 has been updated by David Rodr鱈guez.
Hi @koichi, I'm still running into this issue... :( I really don't know what's going on, because the tests pass in ruby's test suite, but the `c_return` event is not generated when I use the TracePoint API.
require 'minitest/autorun'
class TestTracePoint < Minitest::Test
def test_method_missing
events = []
assert !respond_to?(:missing_method_59398)
TracePoint.new(:c_call, :c_return, :call, :return) { |tp|
events << [tp.event, tp.method_id] if tp.method_id == :method_missing
}.enable {
missing_method_59398 rescue nil
}
assert_equal([[:c_call, :method_missing], [:c_return, :method_missing]], events)
end
end
$ ruby --version
ruby 2.1.1p76 (2014-02-24 revision 45161) [i686-linux]
$ ruby test_tracepoint.rb
Run options: --seed 31045
# Running:
F
Finished in 0.035420s, 28.2322 runs/s, 56.4645 assertions/s.
1) Failure:
TestTracePoint#test_method_missing [test_tracepoint.rb:12]:
--- expected
+++ actual
@@ -1 +1 @@
-[[:c_call, :method_missing], [:c_return, :method_missing]]
+[[:c_call, :method_missing]]
1 runs, 2 assertions, 1 failures, 0 errors, 0 skips
Also I have a couple of failing tests in byebug's test suite because of this. https://travis-ci.org/deivid-rodriguez/byebug/jobs/21874423
Thanks a lot.
----------------------------------------
Bug #9321: rb_mod_const_missing does not generate a c-return event
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/9321#change-46007
* Author: Stefan Kaes
* Status: Closed
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee:
* Category: core
* Target version:
* ruby -v: ruby 2.1.0p1 (2013-12-26 revision 44431) [x86_64-darwin12.0]
* Backport: 1.9.3: UNKNOWN, 2.0.0: UNKNOWN, 2.1: UNKNOWN
----------------------------------------
We have had an issue reported for ruby-prof where execution times were attributed incorrectly in the call graph.
It turned out that the problem is caused by a missing c-return event for Module#const_missing.
ruby-prof simulates the ruby call stack by subscribing to line, call, c-call, return and c-return events.
Obviously, the missing return throws ruby-prof off the track.
---Files--------------------------------
rb_mod_const_missing.patch (643 Bytes)
rb_mod_const_missing_with_tests.patch (1.48 KB)
rb_mod_const_missing_with_tests_redefined.patch (3.01 KB)
--
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/