That is good news, that it is due to this code doing funniness than a VM issue. 
This code trying to bring asynchrony within a synchronous environment brings 
new issues.

What do you think that right solution is to the issue of a call expected to be 
immediate, change out to go eventual until the arguments resolve? How can it be 
structured correctly on the stack without generic functions? I think with the 
double dispatch of an eventual but I have not spend much time in this 
particular area. Preventing the vm from crashing would be a good interim step 
but even here I am not sure how to go about crafting a solution.

Thank you for investigating this.

- HH

On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 20:46, Eliot Miranda <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Henry, Hi Marcus,
>
> On Sun, Aug 13, 2017 at 5:08 AM, henry <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi all. I was testing with this eventual_test package and it blows up the 
>> pharo 6.1 vm. I'd welcome pointers
>>
>> http://www.squeaksource.com/TurquoiseTesting.html
>>
>> - HH
>
> I took a look at this and I think you've found a bug in the 
> mustBeBooleanMagic: code.  What's happening is a mustBeBoolean in Integer>>* 
> due to evaluating
>     10 * 42 eventual
> in RefsTest>>testFailureArithmeticPrimitivesWithPromiseArgument
>
> Since 42 eventual is a NearERef the SmallInteger>>* primitive fails and does 
> ^super * anInteger (where anInteger is the NearERef).  So that evaluates 
> Integer>>*
>
> Integer>>* aNumber
> "Refer to the comment in Number * "
> aNumber isInteger ifTrue:
> [^ self digitMultiply: aNumber
> neg: self negative ~~ aNumber negative].
> ^ aNumber adaptToInteger: self andSend: #*
>
> aNumber, being a NearERef, answers a PromiseERef for the isInteger send, and 
> this provokes a mustBeBoolean for the isInteger ifTrue: [...
>
> After the mustBeBooleanMagic: the stack looks wrong. The activation of 
> Integer>>*, which is about to do
>     ^ aNumber adaptToInteger: self andSend: #*
> does not have enough items on the stack.  Instead of containing
>     a NearERef (for 42)
>     10
>      #*
> it contains
>     a PromiseERef (for 42 eventual isInteger)
> and the send of #adaptToInteger:andSend: ends up taking more form the stack 
> than the VM can handle and it crashes.  The bug appears to be with the use of 
> sendNode irInstruction nextBytecodeOffsetAfterJump in 
> Object>>mustBeBooleanMagic: since execution should resume at bytecode 55 
> below, but does so at bytecode 57
>
> 41 <10> pushTemp: 0
> 42 <D0> send: isInteger
> 43 <AC 09> jumpFalse: 54
> 45 <70> self
> 46 <10> pushTemp: 0
> 47 <70> self
> 48 <D1> send: negative
> 49 <10> pushTemp: 0
> 50 <D1> send: negative
> 51 <E2> send: ~~
> 52 <F3> send: digitMultiply:neg:
> 53 <7C> returnTop
> 54 <10> pushTemp: 0
> 55 <70> self
> 56 <24> pushConstant: #*
> 57 <F5> send: adaptToInteger:andSend:
> 58 <7C> returnTop
>
> So the positioning of the context's pc must be before any argument marshaling 
> for the next send, not simply the send itself.
>
> Put a breakpoint at the end of Object>>mustBeBooleanMagic: and add initlaPC 
> and resumePC temporaries at the beginning and capture them via
>     initialPC := context pc.
> at the beginning and then
> context pc: (resumePC := sendNode irInstruction nextBytecodeOffsetAfterJump)
> to see what I'm seeing.
>
> Phew.  Glad it's not a VM bug :-)
>
> HTH
> _,,,^..^,,,_
> best, Eliot

Reply via email to