go/build already ignores them, but they cause make.bash to fail.
Fixes#18931.
Change-Id: Idd5c8c2a6f2309ecd5f0d669660704d6f5612710
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36351
Run-TryBot: Matthew Dempsky <mdempsky@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Ian Lance Taylor <iant@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Currently the net/rpc/jsonrpc package only implements JSON-RPC version
1.0. This change updates the package's documentation with link to find
packages for JSON-RPC 2.0.
Fixes#10929
Change-Id: I3b6f1d17738a1759d7b62ab7b3ecef5b248d30ca
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36330
Reviewed-by: Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@golang.org>
This CL fixes two issues:
1. Load ops were initially always lowered to unsigned loads, even
for signed types. This was fine by itself however LoadReg ops
(used to re-load spilled values) were lowered to signed loads
for signed types. This meant that spills could invalidate
optimizations that assumed the original unsigned load.
2. Types were not always being maintained correctly through rules
designed to eliminate unnecessary zero and sign extensions.
Fixes#18906.
Change-Id: I95785dcadba03f7e3e94524677e7d8d3d3b9b737
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36256
Run-TryBot: Michael Munday <munday@ca.ibm.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Cherry Zhang <cherryyz@google.com>
Address review comments from earlier CLs.
These are changes I was too scared to try to push
down into the original CLs (thanks, Git).
Change-Id: I0e428fad73d71bd2a7d08178cf2e856de3cef19f
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36257
Reviewed-by: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
This is one CL in a long sequence of changes to break up the
go command from one package into a plausible group of packages.
This sequence is concerned only with moving code, not changing
or cleaning up code. There will still be more cleanup after this sequence.
The entire sequence will be submitted together: it is not a goal
for the tree to build at every step.
For #18653.
Change-Id: Ib22fc435827d4a05a77a5200ac437ce00e2a4da3
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36204
Reviewed-by: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
This is one CL in a long sequence of changes to break up the
go command from one package into a plausible group of packages.
This sequence is concerned only with moving code, not changing
or cleaning up code. There will still be more cleanup after this sequence.
The entire sequence will be submitted together: it is not a goal
for the tree to build at every step.
For #18653.
Change-Id: I05629567cc33fef41bc74eba4f7ff66e4851343c
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36203
Reviewed-by: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
This is one CL in a long sequence of changes to break up the
go command from one package into a plausible group of packages.
This sequence is concerned only with moving code, not changing
or cleaning up code. There will still be more cleanup after this sequence.
The entire sequence will be submitted together: it is not a goal
for the tree to build at every step.
For #18653.
Change-Id: Iec17bf2243de129942ae5fba126ec5f217be7303
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36202
Reviewed-by: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
This is one CL in a long sequence of changes to break up the
go command from one package into a plausible group of packages.
This sequence is concerned only with moving code, not changing
or cleaning up code. There will still be more cleanup after this sequence.
The entire sequence will be submitted together: it is not a goal
for the tree to build at every step.
For #18653.
Change-Id: I2f349150659b6ddf6be4c675abba38dfe57ff652
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36201
Reviewed-by: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
This is one CL in a long sequence of changes to break up the
go command from one package into a plausible group of packages.
This sequence is concerned only with moving code, not changing
or cleaning up code. There will still be more cleanup after this sequence.
The entire sequence will be submitted together: it is not a goal
for the tree to build at every step.
For #18653.
Change-Id: I28b20d53d20dff06eede574eb5c20359db0d3991
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36200
Reviewed-by: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
This is one CL in a long sequence of changes to break up the
go command from one package into a plausible group of packages.
This sequence is concerned only with moving code, not changing
or cleaning up code. There will still be more cleanup after this sequence.
The entire sequence will be submitted together: it is not a goal
for the tree to build at every step.
For #18653.
Change-Id: I8e325d75f553b5d0b6224b56a705d2e2cb895de4
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36199
Reviewed-by: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
This is one CL in a long sequence of changes to break up the
go command from one package into a plausible group of packages.
This sequence is concerned only with moving code, not changing
or cleaning up code. There will still be more cleanup after this sequence.
The entire sequence will be submitted together: it is not a goal
for the tree to build at every step.
For #18653.
Change-Id: I2d0ccdb84814537ab8b8842aa1b5f5bc0a88a0fc
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36198
Reviewed-by: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
This is one CL in a long sequence of changes to break up the
go command from one package into a plausible group of packages.
This sequence is concerned only with moving code, not changing
or cleaning up code. There will still be more cleanup after this sequence.
The entire sequence will be submitted together: it is not a goal
for the tree to build at every step.
For #18653.
Change-Id: Icdd181098f9f0e81f68bf201e6867cdd8f820300
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36197
Reviewed-by: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
This is one CL in a long sequence of changes to break up the
go command from one package into a plausible group of packages.
This sequence is concerned only with moving code, not changing
or cleaning up code. There will still be more cleanup after this sequence.
The entire sequence will be submitted together: it is not a goal
for the tree to build at every step.
For #18653.
Change-Id: Ic802483e50598def638f1e2e706d5fdf7822d32d
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36196
Reviewed-by: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
This is one CL in a long sequence of changes to break up the
go command from one package into a plausible group of packages.
This sequence is concerned only with moving code, not changing
or cleaning up code. There will still be more cleanup after this sequence.
The entire sequence will be submitted together: it is not a goal
for the tree to build at every step.
For #18653.
Change-Id: I20dbc352c3df3c83a75811dd8e78c580a46b2202
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36195
Reviewed-by: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
This is one CL in a long sequence of changes to break up the
go command from one package into a plausible group of packages.
This sequence is concerned only with moving code, not changing
or cleaning up code. There will still be more cleanup after this sequence.
The entire sequence will be submitted together: it is not a goal
for the tree to build at every step.
For #18653.
Change-Id: I4cf05b076d81b780c87a31378523929b5da8964b
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36194
Reviewed-by: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
This is one CL in a long sequence of changes to break up the
go command from one package into a plausible group of packages.
This sequence is concerned only with moving code, not changing
or cleaning up code. There will still be more cleanup after this sequence.
The entire sequence will be submitted together: it is not a goal
for the tree to build at every step.
For #18653.
Change-Id: I7c5dde6e7fe4f390e6607303b4d42535c674eac3
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36193
Reviewed-by: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
This is one CL in a long sequence of changes to break up the
go command from one package into a plausible group of packages.
This sequence is concerned only with moving code, not changing
or cleaning up code. There will still be more cleanup after this sequence.
The entire sequence will be submitted together: it is not a goal
for the tree to build at every step.
For #18653.
Change-Id: I6ee5b053683034ea9462a9a0a4ea4f5ad24fa5a1
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36192
Reviewed-by: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
This is one CL in a long sequence of changes to break up the
go command from one package into a plausible group of packages.
This sequence is concerned only with moving code, not changing
or cleaning up code. There will still be more cleanup after this sequence.
The entire sequence will be submitted together: it is not a goal
for the tree to build at every step.
For #18653.
Change-Id: Icb3f168ade91e7da5fcab89ac75b768daefff359
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36191
Reviewed-by: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
This is one CL in a long sequence of changes to break up the
go command from one package into a plausible group of packages.
This sequence is concerned only with moving code, not changing
or cleaning up code. There will still be more cleanup after this sequence.
The entire sequence will be submitted together: it is not a goal
for the tree to build at every step.
For #18653.
Change-Id: I63f578f5ac99c707b599ac5659293c46b275567d
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36190
Reviewed-by: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
This CL makes a few naming changes to break dependencies
between different parts of the go command, to make it easier
to split into different packages.
This is the first CL in a long sequence of changes to break up the
go command from one package into a plausible group of packages.
This sequence is concerned only with moving code, not changing
or cleaning up code. There will still be more cleanup after this sequence.
The entire sequence will be submitted together: it is not a goal
for the tree to build at every step.
For #18653.
Change-Id: I69a98b9ea48e61b1e1cda95273d29860b525415f
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36129
Reviewed-by: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
Before this CL, Go programs in c-archive or c-shared buildmodes
would not handle SIGPIPE. That leads to surprising behaviour where
writes on a closed pipe or socket would raise SIGPIPE and terminate
the program. This CL changes the Go runtime to handle
SIGPIPE regardless of buildmode. In addition, SIGPIPE from non-Go
code is forwarded.
This is a refinement of CL 32796 that fixes the case where a non-default
handler for SIGPIPE is installed by the host C program.
Fixes#17393
Change-Id: Ia41186e52c1ac209d0a594bae9904166ae7df7de
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/35960
Run-TryBot: Elias Naur <elias.naur@gmail.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Ian Lance Taylor <iant@golang.org>
If there is a defer, and that defer recovers, then the caller
can see all of the output parameters. That means that we must
mark all the output parameters live at any point which might panic.
If there is no defer then this is not necessary. This is implemented.
We could also detect whether there is a recover in any of the defers.
If not, we would need to mark only output params that the defer
actually references (and the closure mechanism already does that).
This is not implemented.
Fixes#18860.
Change-Id: If984fe6686eddce9408bf25e725dd17fc16b8578
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36030
Reviewed-by: Austin Clements <austin@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Russ Cox <rsc@golang.org>
These rules trigger 116 times while running make.bash.
And at least for the sample code at
https://github.com/golang/go/issues/18906#issuecomment-277174241
they are providing optimizations not already present
in amd64.
Updates #18906
Change-Id: I410a480f566f5ab176fc573fb5ac74f9cffec225
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36217
Run-TryBot: Josh Bleecher Snyder <josharian@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
sigtramp was calling sigtrampgo and depending on the fact that
the 3rd argument slot will not be modified on return. Our calling
convention doesn't guarantee that. Avoid that assumption.
There's no actual bug here, as sigtrampgo does not in fact modify its
argument slots. But I found this while working on the dead stack slot
clobbering tool. https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/23924/
Change-Id: Ia7e791a2b4c1c74fff24cba8169e7840b4b06ffc
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36216
Run-TryBot: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Ian Lance Taylor <iant@golang.org>
The name lookups are unrooted; the test should be unrooted too.
Correctly skips the tests if the DNS config specifies a domain
suffix that has a wildcard entry causing all unrooted names to resolve.
Change-Id: I80470326a5d332f3b8d64663f765fd304c5e0811
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36253
Run-TryBot: Russ Cox <rsc@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@golang.org>
It seems the problem is on gdb and the dynamic linker. Skip the
test for now until we figure out what's going on with the system.
Updates #18784.
Change-Id: Ic9320ffd463f6c231b2c4192652263b1cf7f4231
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36250
Run-TryBot: Cherry Zhang <cherryyz@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
The existing darwin/amd64 implementation of runtime.nanotime returns the
wallclock time, which results in timers not functioning properly when
system time runs backwards. By implementing the algorithm used by the
darwin syscall mach_absolute_time, timers will function as expected.
The algorithm is described at
https://opensource.apple.com/source/xnu/xnu-3248.60.10/libsyscall/wrappers/mach_absolute_time.sFixes#17610
Change-Id: I9c8d35240d48249a6837dca1111b1406e2686f67
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/35292
Reviewed-by: Russ Cox <rsc@golang.org>
Run-TryBot: Russ Cox <rsc@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Use (-x)>>63 instead of ((x-1)>>63)^-1 to get a mask that
is 0 when x is 0 and all ones when x is positive.
Saves one instruction when slicing.
Change-Id: Ib46d53d3aac6530ac481fa2f265a6eadf3df0567
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/35641
Run-TryBot: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Cherry Zhang <cherryyz@google.com>
This ensures there isn't a live reference to buf1 on our stack
when MultiReader is inlined.
Fixes#18819.
Change-Id: I96a8cdc1ffad8f8a10c0ddcbf0299005f3176b61
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/35931
Run-TryBot: David Lazar <lazard@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Austin Clements <austin@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Russ Cox <rsc@golang.org>
Instead of always appending to c.Values,
choose whichever slice is larger;
b.Values will be set to nil anyway.
Appending once instead of in a loop also
limits slice growth to once per function call
and is more efficient.
Reduces max rss for the program in #18602 by 6.5%,
and eliminates fuseBlockPlain from the alloc_space
pprof output. fuseBlockPlain previously accounted
for 16.74% of allocated memory.
Updates #18602.
Change-Id: I417b03722d011a59a679157da43dc91f4425210e
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/35114
Run-TryBot: Josh Bleecher Snyder <josharian@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Remove rotate generation from walk. Remove OLROT and ssa.Lrot* opcodes.
Generate rotates during SSA lowering for architectures that have them.
This CL will allow rotates to be generated in more situations,
like when the shift values are determined to be constant
only after some analysis.
Fixes#18254
Change-Id: I8d6d684ff5ce2511aceaddfda98b908007851079
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/34232
Run-TryBot: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Cherry Zhang <cherryyz@google.com>
Intrinsics are ok to inline as they don't rewrite to actual calls.
Change-Id: Ieb19c834c61579823c62c6d1a1b425d6c4d4de23
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/34272
Run-TryBot: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: David Chase <drchase@google.com>
When we discover a relation x <= len(s), also discover the relation
x <= cap(s). That way, in situations like:
a := s[x:] // tests 0 <= x <= len(s)
b := s[:x] // tests 0 <= x <= cap(s)
the second check can be eliminated.
Fixes#16813
Change-Id: Ifc037920b6955e43bac1a1eaf6bac63a89cfbd44
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/33633
Run-TryBot: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Alexandru Moșoi <alexandru@mosoi.ro>
Reviewed-by: David Chase <drchase@google.com>
CSE opportunities were being missed for commutative ops. We used to
order the args of commutative ops (by arg ID) once at the start of CSE.
But that may not be enough.
i1 = (Load ptr mem)
i2 = (Load ptr mem)
x1 = (Add i1 j)
x2 = (Add i2 j)
Equivalent commutative ops x1 and x2 may not get their args ordered in
the same way because because at the start of CSE, we don't know that
the i values will be CSEd. If x1 and x2 get opposite orders we won't
CSE them.
Instead, (re)order the args of commutative operations by their
equivalence class IDs each time we partition an equivalence class.
Change-Id: Ic609fa83b85299782a5e85bf93dc6023fccf4b0c
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/33632
Run-TryBot: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Todd Neal <todd@tneal.org>
Fixes#10561.
Provides a better diagnostic message for failed type switch
satisfaction in the case that a value receiver is being used
in place of the pointer receiver that implements and satisfies
the interface.
Change-Id: If8c13ba13f2a8d81bf44bac7c3a66c12921ba921
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/35235
Reviewed-by: Matthew Dempsky <mdempsky@google.com>
Run-TryBot: Matthew Dempsky <mdempsky@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Change-Id: Ib2c1490a42e3485913a05a0b2fecdcc425d42871
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36083
Run-TryBot: Ian Lance Taylor <iant@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Ian Lance Taylor <iant@golang.org>
TestMain doesn't make use of any flags.
Change-Id: I98ec582fb004045a5067618f605ccfeb1f9f4bbb
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/33613
Reviewed-by: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
Run-TryBot: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Tests that use TestMain might never call m.Run(), and simply return
from TestMain. In that case, the iOS test harness never sees the
PASS from the testing framework and assumes the test failed.
Allow an exit with exit code 0 to also mean test success, thereby
fixing the objdump test on iOS.
Change-Id: I1fe9077b05931aa0905e41b88945cd153c5b35b6
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36065
Reviewed-by: David Crawshaw <crawshaw@golang.org>
Run-TryBot: Elias Naur <elias.naur@gmail.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
