Skip to content

Do not use nint / nuint in IL baselines#78246

Merged
jaredpar merged 8 commits intodotnet:mainfrom
jaredpar:il
Apr 28, 2025
Merged

Do not use nint / nuint in IL baselines#78246
jaredpar merged 8 commits intodotnet:mainfrom
jaredpar:il

Conversation

@jaredpar
Copy link
Member

This removes the use of nint / nuint in our default IL display baselines. Using them caused issues for our tests that run on both .NET Core and .NET Framework TFMs as it caused IntPtr / UIntPtr to display different in each case. This is an attempt to normalize our baselines so it's more resilient to tests like this.

In general, our IL baselines should reflect metadata names, not C# type names, to further this goal. Did consider removing UseSpecialNames from ILVisualizationFormat but that was very disruptive.

closes #78240

@ghost ghost added Area-Compilers untriaged Issues and PRs which have not yet been triaged by a lead labels Apr 22, 2025
@jaredpar jaredpar removed the untriaged Issues and PRs which have not yet been triaged by a lead label Apr 24, 2025
This removes the use of `nint / nuint` in our default IL display
baselines. Using them caused issues for our tests that run on both .NET
Core and .NET Framework TFMs as it caused `IntPtr / UIntPtr` to display
different in each case. This is an attempt to normalize our baselines so
it's more resilient to tests like this.

In general, our IL baselines should reflect metadata names, not C# type
names, to further this goal. Did consider removing `UseSpecialNames`
from `ILVisualizationFormat` but that was very disruptive.

closes dotnet#78240
@jaredpar jaredpar marked this pull request as ready for review April 28, 2025 16:24
@jaredpar jaredpar requested a review from a team as a code owner April 28, 2025 16:24
@jaredpar
Copy link
Member Author

@dotnet/roslyn-compiler PTAL.


/// <summary>
/// "List`1" instead of "List&lt;T&gt;" ("List(of T)" in VB). Overrides GenericsOptions on
/// "List`1" instead o "List&lt;T&gt;" ("List(of T)" in VB). Overrides GenericsOptions on
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

o

Revert?

ReverseArrayRankSpecifiers = 1 << 5,

/// <summary>
/// Display `System.[U]IntPtr` instead of `n[u]int`.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

.

Revert?

@jaredpar jaredpar enabled auto-merge (squash) April 28, 2025 17:58
@jaredpar jaredpar merged commit afb3565 into dotnet:main Apr 28, 2025
23 of 24 checks passed
@dotnet-policy-service dotnet-policy-service bot added this to the Next milestone Apr 28, 2025
333fred added a commit to 333fred/roslyn that referenced this pull request May 8, 2025
333fred added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 19, 2025
* Handle basic await scenarios (#76121)

Add initial handling of expressions that return `Task`, `Task<T>`, `ValueTask`, `ValueTask<T>`.

* Add RuntimeAsyncMethodGenerationAttribute (#77543)

Adds control for whether to use runtime async. The flowchart is as follows:

1. The flag `System.Runtime.CompilerServices.RuntimeFeature.Async` must be present.
2. Assuming that flag is present, we look for the presence of `System.Runtime.CompilerServices.RuntimeAsyncMethodGenerationAttribute` on the method. If that attribute is present, we use the preference expressed in the attribute. The preference does not carry to nested contexts, such as local functions or lambdas.
3. If the attribute is not present, we look for `features:runtime-async=on` on the command line. If that is present, then the feature is on by default. Otherwise, the feature is off.

* Semantic search info

* Implement custom awaitable support (#78071)

This adds support for awaiting task-like types that are not natively supported by runtime async. Closes #77897.

* Move runtime async method validation into initial binding (#78310)

We now do method construction and validation for runtime async helpers up front in initial binding, rather than doing it in `RuntimeAsyncRewriter`. I've also renamed the APIs as per dotnet/runtime#114310 (comment) (though I haven't added ConfigureAwait support yet, that will be the next PR). We now validate:

* The helpers come from `System.Runtime.CompilerServices.AsyncHelpers`, defined in corelib. This means that I now need a fairly extensive corelib mock to be able to compile. When we have a testing runtime that defines these helpers, we can remove the giant mock and use the real one.
* We properly error when expected helpers aren't present.
* We properly check to make sure that constraints are satisfied when doing generic substitution in one of the runtime helpers.
* Runtime async is not turned on if the async method does not return `Task`, `Task<T>`, `ValueTask`, or `ValueTask<T>`.

Relates to test plan #75960

* React to main changes #78246 and #78231.

* Switch MethodImplAttributes.Async to 0x2000 (#78536)

It was changed in dotnet/runtime#114310 as 0x400 is a thing in framework.

* Ensure return local is the correct type for runtime async (#78603)

* Add test demonstrating current behavior

* Ensure return local is the correct type in async scenarios

* Ensure method is actually async when doing local rewrite

* Exception Handler support (#78773)

* Update EH tests to run with runtime async

* Handle non-null exception filter prologues in the spill sequencer

* Add more testing to show current incorrect behavior

* Unskip ConditionalFacts that do not need to be skipped.

* Handle ensuring that the method remains valid, even when there is an `await` in a finally section. Add signifcant testing of `await using`.

* Fix baselines

* Support `await foreach` and add runtime async verification to existing tests.

* Remove unnecessary generic

* Failing tests, add async void test suggestion

* CI failures

* Add additional test

* Test fixes

* Remove implemented PROTOTYPE, add assertion on behavior.

* Update to SpillSequenceSpiller after some more debugging and tightening the assertion

* Fix nullref

* Enable nullable for VisitCatchBlock

* Support using a simple overload resolution for finding Await helpers from the BCL (#79135)

* Support using a simple overload resolution for finding Await helpers from the BCL

This PR removes special knowledge of what `Await` helpers correspond to what types, and instead implements a very simple form of overload resolution. We immediately bail on any conflict or error and fall back to attempting to use `AwaitAwaiter` or `UnsafeAwaitAwaiter` when such scenarios are detected. I've also updated the rules to better reflect what is actually implementable.

* Create the full BoundCall in initial binding.

* PR feedback.

* Baseline struct lifting tests (#79505)

* Extract expectedOutput constants, minor touchups

* Rename expected -> expectedOutput

* Include new testing with placeholder baselines

* Progress

* First ILVerify pass

* Initial baseline IL run.

* Further baseline additions and skips based on missing corelib apis.

* Clone async void tests and have them use async Task, and validate existing code spit for these under runtime async

* Update baselines after .NET 10 intake

* Delete the stub

* Remove long dynamic baseline and leave a prototype.

* Feedback.

* BOM

* Remove unused references parameter

* Block `await dynamic`

* Block hoisted variables from runtime async for now

* Update test baselines for block

* Block arglist in runtime async

* Add IL baseline

* Handle an additional branch beyond the end of the method case.

* Move prototype comments to issues.

* Remove entry point prototypes

* Add assert and comment

* Add back assert

* Report obsolete/experimental diagnostics on await helpers.

* Fix ref safety analysis build error.

---------

Signed-off-by: Emmanuel Ferdman <emmanuelferdman@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Jan Jones <janjones@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: dotnet-maestro[bot] <dotnet-maestro[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Cyrus Najmabadi <cyrusn@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: David Barbet <dabarbet@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Ankita Khera <40616383+akhera99@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: David Wengier <david.wengier@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Rikki Gibson <rigibson@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Cyrus Najmabadi <cyrus.najmabadi@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Rikki Gibson <rikkigibson@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: akhera99 <ankitakhera@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Joey Robichaud <joseph.robichaud@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Todd Grunke <toddgrun@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Youssef1313 <youssefvictor00@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Joey Robichaud <jorobich@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Tomáš Matoušek <tmat@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Amadeusz Wieczorek <amwieczo@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Charles Stoner <10732005+cston@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Jared Parsons <jared@paranoidcoding.org>
Co-authored-by: Sam Harwell <Sam.Harwell@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: dotnet-maestro[bot] <42748379+dotnet-maestro[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Jason Malinowski <jason.malinowski@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Etienne Baudoux <etbaudou@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: AlekseyTs <AlekseyTs@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Jan Jones <jan.jones.cz@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Maryam Ariyan <maariyan@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Andrew Hall <andrha@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Arun Chander <arkalyan@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Kauwai Lucchesi <53876126+kauwai@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Bill Wagner <wiwagn@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: PaddiM8 <hi@bakk.dev>
Co-authored-by: Matteo Prosperi <maprospe@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Julien Couvreur <julien.couvreur@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Matteo Prosperi <41970398+matteo-prosperi@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Carlos Sánchez López <1175054+carlossanlop@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Tomas Matousek <tomat@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Deepak Rathore (ALLYIS INC) <v-deerathore@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Emmanuel Ferdman <emmanuelferdman@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Evgeny Tvorun <evgenyt@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Victor Pogor <victor.pogor@outlook.com>
Co-authored-by: Ella Hathaway <67609881+ellahathaway@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Viktor Hofer <viktor.hofer@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Jason Malinowski <jason@jason-m.com>
Co-authored-by: DoctorKrolic <mapmyp03@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: John Douglas Leitch <JohnLeitch@outlook.com>
Co-authored-by: Matt Thalman <mthalman@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Bernd Baumanns <baumannsbernd@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Thomas Shephard <thomas@thomas-shephard.com>
Co-authored-by: DoctorKrolic <70431552+DoctorKrolic@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: David Barbet <dibarbet@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Chris Sienkiewicz <chsienki@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: tmat <tomas.matousek@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: gel@microsoft.com <gel@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Gen Lu <genlu@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Oleg Tkachenko <olegtk@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Matt Mitchell <mmitche@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Djuradj Kurepa <91743470+dkurepa@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Copilot <198982749+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Stuart Lang <stuart.b.lang@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: RaymondY <yangrongwei@hotmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Gobind Singh <gobindsingh2004@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: David Kean <davkean@microsoft.com>
@RikkiGibson RikkiGibson modified the milestones: Next, 18.0 P1 Aug 19, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

IL baselines in the compiler should use metadata display

3 participants