[wasm] Implement polymorphic checking, matching the reference interpreter.

[wasm] Implement polymorphic checking, matching the reference interpreter.

R=rossberg@chromium.org, bradnelson@chromium.org
BUG=chromium:682659
Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#42904}
Committed: https://chromium.googlesource.com/v8/v8/+/a9b8a5675841a616870ee053419da5937eaf66ef

[titzer, 2017-02-02 01:16:13]

The CQ bit was checked by titzer@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-02 01:16:34]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[titzer, 2017-02-02 01:21:56]

On 2017/02/02 01:16:09, titzer wrote:

Note that this is based on rossberg's implementation, which was based on my
unreachable change.
This is ready to review and I think we want to land this.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-02 01:36:47]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-02 01:36:48]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  v8_linux_dbg_ng on master.tryserver.v8 (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.v8/builders/v8_linux_dbg_ng/builds/20371)
  v8_linux_dbg_ng_triggered on master.tryserver.v8 (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.v8/builders/v8_linux_dbg_ng_triggered/b...)

[bradnelson, 2017-02-02 01:55:09]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/1/test/cctest/wasm/test-run-w...
File test/cctest/wasm/test-run-wasm.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/1/test/cctest/wasm/test-run-w...
test/cctest/wasm/test-run-wasm.cc:1301: //  BUILD(r, B2(RET_I8(99),
WASM_SET_LOCAL(0, WASM_ZERO)));
Why?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/1/test/cctest/wasm/test-run-w...
test/cctest/wasm/test-run-wasm.cc:1782: //  CHECK_EQ(9, r.Call(0));
Why?

[titzer, 2017-02-02 06:50:25]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/1/test/cctest/wasm/test-run-w...
File test/cctest/wasm/test-run-wasm.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/1/test/cctest/wasm/test-run-w...
test/cctest/wasm/test-run-wasm.cc:1301: //  BUILD(r, B2(RET_I8(99),
WASM_SET_LOCAL(0, WASM_ZERO)));
On 2017/02/02 01:55:09, bradnelson wrote:
> Why?

Disabled these tests because this CL was based on unreachable code being
disallowed. Fixed.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/1/test/cctest/wasm/test-run-w...
test/cctest/wasm/test-run-wasm.cc:1782: //  CHECK_EQ(9, r.Call(0));
On 2017/02/02 01:55:09, bradnelson wrote:
> Why?

Ditto.

[rossberg, 2017-02-02 13:01:27]

LGTM modulo nits and disabled tests.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/src/wasm/function-body-...
File src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/src/wasm/function-body-...
src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc:755: c->unreachable = false;
Why is this set to false twice?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/src/wasm/function-body-...
src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc:814: c->unreachable = false;
This pattern occurs several times, could this be moved into FallThruTo?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/src/wasm/function-body-...
src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc:866: PushEndValues(c);
Nit: calling the function might make the preceding comment redundant.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/src/wasm/function-body-...
src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc:868: DCHECK_EQ(c->stack_depth +
c->merge.arity, stack_.size());
Maybe move this assertion into PushEndValues?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/src/wasm/function-body-...
src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc:882: TypeCheckLoopFallThru(c);
Nit: might make sense to remove the "Loop" from the name of this function.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/src/wasm/function-body-...
src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc:1291: void EndControl(int len) {
The parameter seems to be unused.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/src/wasm/function-body-...
src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc:1445: void DoReturn(int len) {
And transitively, this one, too.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/test/cctest/wasm/test-r...
File test/cctest/wasm/test-run-wasm.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/test/cctest/wasm/test-r...
test/cctest/wasm/test-run-wasm.cc:1823: byte* memory = r.module().AddMemory(8);
Doesn't the compiler complain about the unused var?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/test/unittests/wasm/fun...
File test/unittests/wasm/function-body-decoder-unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/test/unittests/wasm/fun...
test/unittests/wasm/function-body-decoder-unittest.cc:576: // 
EXPECT_VERIFIES(v_v, B2(WASM_BR(0), WASM_NOP));
What's with these?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/test/unittests/wasm/fun...
test/unittests/wasm/function-body-decoder-unittest.cc:741: // 
EXPECT_VERIFIES(i_i, WASM_IF_ELSE_I(WASM_GET_LOCAL(0), WASM_UNREACHABLE,
And these?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/test/unittests/wasm/fun...
test/unittests/wasm/function-body-decoder-unittest.cc:1836: //
TEST_F(FunctionBodyDecoderTest, BreakEnd) {
And this?

[titzer, 2017-02-02 18:43:14]

The CQ bit was checked by titzer@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-02 18:43:20]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-02 18:46:50]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-02 18:46:51]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  v8_linux64_gyp_rel_ng on master.tryserver.v8 (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.v8/builders/v8_linux64_gyp_rel_ng/build...)
  v8_linux_mipsel_compile_rel on master.tryserver.v8 (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.v8/builders/v8_linux_mipsel_compile_rel...)
  v8_linux_rel_ng on master.tryserver.v8 (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.v8/builders/v8_linux_rel_ng/builds/20321)
  v8_mac_rel_ng on master.tryserver.v8 (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.v8/builders/v8_mac_rel_ng/builds/16832)

[titzer, 2017-02-02 18:48:31]

The CQ bit was checked by titzer@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-02 18:48:41]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[titzer, 2017-02-02 18:50:19]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/src/wasm/function-body-...
File src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/src/wasm/function-body-...
src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc:755: c->unreachable = false;
On 2017/02/02 13:01:27, rossberg wrote:
> Why is this set to false twice?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/src/wasm/function-body-...
src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc:814: c->unreachable = false;
On 2017/02/02 13:01:27, rossberg wrote:
> This pattern occurs several times, could this be moved into FallThruTo?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/src/wasm/function-body-...
src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc:866: PushEndValues(c);
On 2017/02/02 13:01:27, rossberg wrote:
> Nit: calling the function might make the preceding comment redundant.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/src/wasm/function-body-...
src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc:868: DCHECK_EQ(c->stack_depth +
c->merge.arity, stack_.size());
On 2017/02/02 13:01:27, rossberg wrote:
> Maybe move this assertion into PushEndValues?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/src/wasm/function-body-...
src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc:882: TypeCheckLoopFallThru(c);
On 2017/02/02 13:01:27, rossberg wrote:
> Nit: might make sense to remove the "Loop" from the name of this function.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/src/wasm/function-body-...
src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc:1291: void EndControl(int len) {
On 2017/02/02 13:01:27, rossberg wrote:
> The parameter seems to be unused.

Done.
A holdover from the disallowing-unreachable patch.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/src/wasm/function-body-...
src/wasm/function-body-decoder.cc:1445: void DoReturn(int len) {
On 2017/02/02 13:01:27, rossberg wrote:
> And transitively, this one, too.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/test/cctest/wasm/test-r...
File test/cctest/wasm/test-run-wasm.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/test/cctest/wasm/test-r...
test/cctest/wasm/test-run-wasm.cc:1823: byte* memory = r.module().AddMemory(8);
On 2017/02/02 13:01:27, rossberg wrote:
> Doesn't the compiler complain about the unused var?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/test/unittests/wasm/fun...
File test/unittests/wasm/function-body-decoder-unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/test/unittests/wasm/fun...
test/unittests/wasm/function-body-decoder-unittest.cc:576: // 
EXPECT_VERIFIES(v_v, B2(WASM_BR(0), WASM_NOP));
On 2017/02/02 13:01:27, rossberg wrote:
> What's with these?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/test/unittests/wasm/fun...
test/unittests/wasm/function-body-decoder-unittest.cc:741: // 
EXPECT_VERIFIES(i_i, WASM_IF_ELSE_I(WASM_GET_LOCAL(0), WASM_UNREACHABLE,
On 2017/02/02 13:01:27, rossberg wrote:
> And these?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/diff/20001/test/unittests/wasm/fun...
test/unittests/wasm/function-body-decoder-unittest.cc:1836: //
TEST_F(FunctionBodyDecoderTest, BreakEnd) {
On 2017/02/02 13:01:27, rossberg wrote:
> And this?

Done.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-02 18:51:31]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-02 18:51:32]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  v8_linux64_gyp_rel_ng on master.tryserver.v8 (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.v8/builders/v8_linux64_gyp_rel_ng/build...)
  v8_linux_gcc_compile_rel on master.tryserver.v8 (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.v8/builders/v8_linux_gcc_compile_rel/bu...)
  v8_linux_nodcheck_rel_ng on master.tryserver.v8 (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.v8/builders/v8_linux_nodcheck_rel_ng/bu...)

[titzer, 2017-02-02 18:56:13]

The CQ bit was checked by titzer@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-02 18:56:20]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[rossberg, 2017-02-02 18:58:34]

lgtm

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-02 18:59:12]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-02 18:59:13]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  v8_linux_gcc_compile_rel on master.tryserver.v8 (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.v8/builders/v8_linux_gcc_compile_rel/bu...)
  v8_linux_mips64el_compile_rel on master.tryserver.v8 (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.v8/builders/v8_linux_mips64el_compile_r...)
  v8_linux_mipsel_compile_rel on master.tryserver.v8 (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.v8/builders/v8_linux_mipsel_compile_rel...)
  v8_mac_rel_ng on master.tryserver.v8 (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.v8/builders/v8_mac_rel_ng/builds/16836)
  v8_win_rel_ng on master.tryserver.v8 (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.v8/builders/v8_win_rel_ng/builds/22075)

[titzer, 2017-02-02 20:50:15]

The CQ bit was checked by titzer@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-02 20:50:19]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[titzer, 2017-02-02 21:08:57]

The CQ bit was checked by titzer@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-02 21:09:06]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-02 21:35:20]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-02 21:35:21]

Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

[titzer, 2017-02-02 22:59:29]

On 2017/02/02 18:58:34, rossberg wrote:
> lgtm

Confirmed it passes the spec tests as well. Landing.

I'll redo my other incarnations after this lands.

[titzer, 2017-02-02 23:04:34]

The CQ bit was checked by titzer@chromium.org

[titzer, 2017-02-02 23:04:35]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from
rossberg@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002/#ps140001
(title: "Fix test-run-simd")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-02 23:04:46]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-02 23:06:22]

CQ is committing da patch.

Bot data: {"patchset_id": 140001, "attempt_start_ts": 1486076674859660,
"parent_rev": "a62322aadbe3807d923bb7c4f1f930788e808a2b", "commit_rev":
"a9b8a5675841a616870ee053419da5937eaf66ef"}

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-02 23:06:28]

Description was changed from

==========
[wasm] Implement polymorphic checking, matching the reference interpreter.

R=rossberg@chromium.org, bradnelson@chromium.org
BUG=chromium:682659
==========

to

==========
[wasm] Implement polymorphic checking, matching the reference interpreter.

R=rossberg@chromium.org, bradnelson@chromium.org
BUG=chromium:682659

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2670673002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#42904}
Committed:
https://chromium.googlesource.com/v8/v8/+/a9b8a5675841a616870ee053419da5937ea...
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-02 23:06:29]

Committed patchset #8 (id:140001) as
https://chromium.googlesource.com/v8/v8/+/a9b8a5675841a616870ee053419da5937ea...