From: "Keller, Jacob E" <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>,
"Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>,
"Kitszel, Przemyslaw" <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>,
Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr>,
"cocci@inria.fr" <cocci@inria.fr>
Subject: RE: [cocci] [BUG] exponentially slow spatch
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 19:48:47 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CO1PR11MB50895C3058E76DA4DA18955CD6BDA@CO1PR11MB5089.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bd4cf465-63ed-4161-ab05-429e6a23338c@web.de>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 12:20 AM
> To: Brandeburg, Jesse <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>; Kitszel, Przemyslaw
> <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>; Keller, Jacob E <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>; Julia
> Lawall <Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr>; cocci@inria.fr
> Subject: Re: [cocci] [BUG] exponentially slow spatch
>
> >> we were bothered by, what we have called a "flaky spatch" issues
> >> in our CI servers, which have manifested as spatch "just exiting",
> >> without any proper exit codes.
> >> Jake & Jesse found out that processing large files (like 100kloc
> >> amalgamate builds...) or parallel processing makes it more common,
> >> so we have disabled those.
> >> Now I see that those builds were likely killed (or spatch "crashes"?).
> >>
> >> The issue hit me again, so I dig deeper, and the case is that processing
> >> time grows exponentially for seemingly easy case, attached.
> …
> >> +++ b/small.cocci
> >> @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
> >> +@@
> >> +expression list E;
> >> +expression hw;
> >> +@@
> >> +(
> >> +- ice_info(hw,E);
> >> ++ dev_info(ice_hw_to_dev(hw),E);
> >> +)
>
> How do you think about to use a script variant (for the semantic patch language)
> like the following?
>
> @adjustment@
> expression hw;
> @@
> -ice_info
> +dev_info
> (
> + ice_hw_to_dev(
> hw
> + )
> ,
> ...
> )
> ;
>
>
>
> Do you observe more desirable run time characteristics for the Coccinelle
> software
> also according to another update?
>
> avoid double call to line_removed
> 2023-11-21
> https://gitlab.inria.fr/coccinelle/coccinelle/-
> /commit/162a9149cfa92702fa4c26e513cb69e310ab0e10
>
>
> Regards,
> Markus
Yea, Julia reported this change to us. I don't think we've had a chance to test it fully yet, but it looks promising.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-27 19:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20231109161846.148524-1-przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>
2023-11-21 20:45 ` [cocci] [BUG] exponentially slow spatch Jesse Brandeburg
2023-11-21 20:58 ` Julia Lawall
2023-11-21 22:34 ` Julia Lawall
2023-11-21 22:57 ` Julia Lawall
2023-11-22 8:20 ` Markus Elfring
2023-11-27 19:48 ` Keller, Jacob E [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CO1PR11MB50895C3058E76DA4DA18955CD6BDA@CO1PR11MB5089.namprd11.prod.outlook.com \
--to=jacob.e.keller@intel.com \
--cc=Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr \
--cc=Markus.Elfring@web.de \
--cc=cocci@inria.fr \
--cc=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
--cc=przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).