merge: 20231022 #441
Merged
merge: 20231022 #441
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Reviewed-by: Abhijit Menon-Sen Reviewed-by: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAApHDvobgmCs6CohqhKTUf7D8vffoZXQTCBTERo9gbOeZmvLTw%40mail.gmail.com Backpatch-through: 11, where JIT was added
…functions. Previously we only copied the function attributes. That caused problems at least on s390x: Because we didn't copy the 'zeroext' attribute for ExecAggTransReparent()'s *IsNull parameters, expressions invoking it didn't ensure that the upper bytes of the registers were zeroed. In the - relatively rare - cases where not, ExecAggTransReparent() wrongly ended up in the newValueIsNull branch due to the register not being zero. Subsequently causing a crash. It's quite possible that this would cause problems on other platforms, and in other places than just ExecAggTransReparent() on s390x. Thanks to Christoph (and the Debian project) for providing me with access to a s390x machine, allowing me to debug this. Reported-By: Christoph Berg Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/[email protected] Backpatch: 11-, where JIT was added
Unfortunately in LLVM 3.9 LLVMGetAttributeCountAtIndex(func, index) crashes when called with an index that has 0 attributes. Since there's no way to work around this in the C API, add a small C++ wrapper doing so. The only reason this didn't fail before 7255943 is that there always are function attributes... Author: Andres Freund <[email protected]> Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/[email protected] Backpatch: 11-, like 7255943
As there haven't been problem on the buildfarm due to this change, backpatch 6c57f2e now. Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/[email protected] Backpatch: 11-, where jit support was added
…ions. clang only uses the 'i1' type for scalar booleans, not for pointers to booleans (as the pointer might be pointing into a larger memory allocation). Therefore a pointer-to-bool needs to the "storage" boolean. There's no known case of wrong code generation due to this, but it seems quite possible that it could cause problems (see e.g. 7255943). Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/[email protected] Backpatch: 11-, where jit support was added
LLVM 13 (due out in September) has changed the semantics of LLVMOrcAbsoluteSymbols(), so we need to bump some reference counts to avoid a double-free that causes crashes and bad query results. A proactive change seems necessary to avoid having a window of time where our respective latest releases would interact badly. It's possible that the situation could change before then, though. Thanks to Fabien Coelho for monitoring bleeding edge LLVM and Andres Freund for tracking down the change. Back-patch to 11, where the JIT code arrived. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CA%2BhUKGLEy8mgtN7BNp0ooFAjUedDTJj5dME7NxLU-m91b85siA%40mail.gmail.com
Code inlined by LLVM can crash or fail with "Relocation type not implemented yet!" if it tries to access thread local variables. Don't inline such code. Back-patch to 11, where LLVM arrived. Bug #16696. Author: Dmitry Marakasov <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Andres Freund <[email protected]> Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/[email protected]
…ors. If an allocation failed within LLVM it is not safe to call back into LLVM as LLVM is not generally safe against exceptions / stack-unwinding. Thus errors while in LLVM code are promoted to FATAL. However llvm_shutdown() did call back into LLVM even in such cases, while llvm_release_context() was careful not to do so. We cannot generally skip shutting down LLVM, as that can break profiling. But it's OK to do so if there was an error from within LLVM. Reported-By: Jelte Fennema <[email protected]> Author: Andres Freund <[email protected]> Author: Justin Pryzby <[email protected]> Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/AM5PR83MB0178C52CCA0A8DEA0207DC14F7FF9@AM5PR83MB0178.EURPRD83.prod.outlook.com Backpatch: 11-, where jit was introduced
Per https://llvm.org/docs/OpaquePointers.html, support for non-opaque pointers still exists and we can request that on our context. We have until LLVM 16 to move to opaque pointers, a much larger change. Back-patch to 11, where LLVM support arrived. Author: Thomas Munro <[email protected]> Author: Andres Freund <[email protected]> Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAMHz58Sf_xncdyqsekoVsNeKcruKootLtVH6cYXVhhUR1oKPCg%40mail.gmail.com
While on it, newlines are removed from the end of two elog() strings. The others are simple grammar mistakes. One comment in pg_upgrade referred incorrectly to sequences since a7e5457. Author: Justin Pryzby Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/[email protected] Backpatch-through: 11
llvm_release_context() called llvm_enter_fatal_on_oom(), but was missing the corresponding llvm_leave_fatal_on_oom() call. As a result, if JIT was used at all, we were almost always in the "fatal-on-oom" state. It only makes a difference if you use an extension written in C++, and run out of memory in a C++ 'new' call. In that case, you would get a PostgreSQL FATAL error, instead of the default behavior of throwing a C++ exception. Back-patch to all supported versions. Reviewed-by: Daniel Gustafsson Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/[email protected]
|
Hi @mrdrivingduck ~ Thanks for your contribution in this PR. ❤️ Please make sure that your PR conforms the standard, and has passed all the checks. We will review your PR as soon as possible. |
|
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
No description provided.