partialexecuter: increment and check basicblock visit count after terminals

[Hyxogen]

No description provided.

[Hyxogen]

Although the crash in leaningtech/cheerp-meta#133 doesn't seem to happen anymore, it did cause a hang.

Closes: leaningtech/cheerp-meta#133

[yuri91]

I don't really have experience with PartialExecuter. I would like @alexp-sssup to have a look.

[alexp-sssup]

This looks reasonable. Currently the check is only done when starting the visit from a new block, but internal visits are not accounted for. Two things

1. Move the new check inside the existing if to better preserve the code history
2. Please validate that prints is still correctly optimized away in easy cases, we might need to bump the max number of visits since we are now counting much more often

[Hyxogen]

@alexp-sssup I did a check with the following code and it generated the exact same before and after the changes:

#include <stdio.h>

int main() {
        printf("%3i, %x, %f, %e, %f, %g, %0f, %10f, %.10f, %-f\n", 42, 21, 3.41, 2.72, 0.5, -6.12, 6564.34534, 0.001, 3.0, -10.433);
}

[alexp-sssup]

That test case is not a good one since it's keeping in lots of logic by using multiple type of % format options.

Try a simpler test case with just %i or %x

[Hyxogen]

That test case is not a good one since it's keeping in lots of logic by using multiple type of % format options.

Try a simpler test case with just %i or %x

I also tried using this one, which also generated the same code before and after:

#include <stdio.h>

int main() {
        printf("%i %i %i %i %i\n", 42, 21, 0, 1, 543234);
        printf("%x %x %x %x %x\n", 42, 21, 0, 1, 543234);
}

[Hyxogen]

That test case is not a good one since it's keeping in lots of logic by using multiple type of % format options.
Try a simpler test case with just %i or %x

I also tried using this one, which also generated the same code before and after:

#include <stdio.h>

int main() {
        printf("%i %i %i %i %i\n", 42, 21, 0, 1, 543234);
        printf("%x %x %x %x %x\n", 42, 21, 0, 1, 543234);
}

I checked, and before and after it does not go through this branch that handles terminals though

[alexp-sssup]

Merged

[alexp-sssup]

I checked, and before and after it does not go through this branch that handles terminals though

That's ok, it means this code path is not as critical as I though