This is an archive of the discontinued LLVM Phabricator instance.

[clang] Improve Serialization/Imporing of APValues
ClosedPublic

Authored by Tyker on Jun 21 2019, 3:07 AM.

Details

Summary

Changes:

  • initializer expressions of constexpr variable are now wraped in a ConstantExpr. this is mainly used for testing purposes. the old caching system has not yet been removed.
  • Add all the missing Serialization and Importing for APValue.
  • Cleanup leftover from last patch.
  • Add Tests for Import and serialization.

Diff Detail

Event Timeline

Tyker created this revision.Jun 21 2019, 3:07 AM
Herald added a reviewer: shafik. · View Herald Transcript
Herald added a project: Restricted Project. · View Herald Transcript
Herald added a subscriber: cfe-commits. · View Herald Transcript
Tyker edited the summary of this revision. (Show Details)Jun 21 2019, 3:09 AM
Tyker updated this revision to Diff 206121.Jun 22 2019, 9:30 AM
Tyker edited the summary of this revision. (Show Details)
Tyker updated this revision to Diff 206464.Jun 25 2019, 9:12 AM
Tyker edited the summary of this revision. (Show Details)

Change:

  • Add support for LValue, MemberPointer and AddrDiffExpr.
  • Add tests for importing.

i wasn't able to test for some APValueKinds: FixePoint, ComplexInt, ComplexFloat, AddrLabelDiff.
LValue could need more tests. i am not sure all edges cases are covered.

Tyker updated this revision to Diff 206467.Jun 25 2019, 9:27 AM
clang/include/clang/AST/ASTImporter.h
501

typo: Constext -> Context
Also, we return with the APValue in the "to" context, not the one in the "from" context.

clang/lib/AST/ASTImporter.cpp
8764

Looks okay, but could we have unit tests for this in ASTImporterTest.cpp?

Tyker updated this revision to Diff 207977.Jul 4 2019, 12:17 AM
Tyker marked 2 inline comments as done.
Tyker set the repository for this revision to rC Clang.

fixed comment typo.

clang/lib/AST/ASTImporter.cpp
8764

I tested importing using the same test file as serialization clang/test/PCH/APValue.cpp with -ast-merge which uses importing. this prevent duplicating the test code for importing and serializing. is the unit-test in ASTImporterTest.cpp necessary anyway ?

martong added inline comments.Jul 4 2019, 2:25 AM
clang/include/clang/AST/ASTImporter.h
501

The typo is still there: Constext has an extra s.

clang/lib/AST/ASTImporter.cpp
8764

Okay, that's fine I missed that previously, so there is no need for the unit-tests in this case.
Though maybe the -ast-merge part of the test should reside in the clang/test/ASTMerge directory, because that is where all the other -ast-merge tests are.
I am not sure how to solve that nicely, because i see you use the same file for both the serialization and for the import.
Perhaps there should be a common header file which is included both in test/PCH/APValue.cpp and in test/ASTMerge/apvalue/test.cpp?

Tyker updated this revision to Diff 208015.Jul 4 2019, 4:31 AM

fixed the comment for good, sorry for that.

Tyker marked 2 inline comments as done.Jul 4 2019, 4:34 AM
Tyker added inline comments.
clang/lib/AST/ASTImporter.cpp
8764

we can have a common header, but i don't know where to put it. having a in PCH that includes a header form ASTMerge seems weird and vice versa.

martong added inline comments.Jul 5 2019, 8:24 AM
clang/lib/AST/ASTImporter.cpp
8764

Yes, that is indeed not so good.

The point is that, we should execute the APValue tests as well when we invoke ninja check-clang-astmerge. (Some people do not execute the whole check-clang verification when they change only the ASTImporter, this way the edit-test cycle can be faster)

Can we have a symbolic link from test/PCH/APValue.cpp to test/ASTMerge/APValue.cpp? Probably that would work on *nix, but not on Windows (https://stackoverflow.com/questions/5917249/git-symlinks-in-windows).
If the symlink is really not an option then I am just fine with a real copy of the file.
If we have a link or a copy then the tests will run twice, that seems ok for me, but may disturb other devs.
Actually, this is an inconvenient problem, perhaps someone had this before, so maybe a mail to cfe-dev could help us out.

Tyker updated this revision to Diff 217600.Aug 28 2019, 4:07 AM

Sorry for the long wait.

Changes:

  • Rebased on current master
  • Duplicated test file so that it runs for both importing

Sorry for the long wait.

Changes:

  • Rebased on current master
  • Duplicated test file so that it runs for both importing

Thanks for addressing the issues. The ASTImporter related changes look good to me now.

aaron.ballman added inline comments.Sep 19 2019, 7:08 AM
clang/include/clang/AST/APValue.h
517

reserveVector per naming conventions

clang/include/clang/AST/ASTContext.h
281

Why are you getting rid of this? It seems like we would still want these cleaned up.

clang/include/clang/AST/Expr.h
962

Enumerator -> Enumerators
there -> their

clang/include/clang/AST/TextNodeDumper.h
149 ↗(On Diff #217600)

Good catch -- this pointed out a bug in the class that I've fixed in r372323, so you'll need to rebase.

clang/lib/AST/APValue.cpp
177

Why is this no longer a pointer to const?

764

Can this function be marked const?

clang/lib/AST/ASTImporter.cpp
8764

Conflict markers?

9017

Please don't use auto as the type is not spelled out in the initialization.

9022

Please don't use auto as the type is not spelled out in the initialization.

(Same elsewhere, I'll stop commenting on them.)

clang/lib/AST/TextNodeDumper.cpp
691–692

You'll have to rebase this too -- these changes shouldn't be needed any longer.

clang/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp
11725

Can elide braces.

clang/lib/Serialization/ASTReader.cpp
9598

auto *

9604–9605

auto *

9611

auto *

9622–9628

These names don't match the current coding conventions.

9631

You should add parens here to avoid diagnostics.

clang/lib/Serialization/ASTWriter.cpp
5492

Name doesn't match coding conventions.

5503

const auto *

5525

const auto *

5529

const auto *

5544

Unrelated change?

clang/lib/Serialization/ASTWriterStmt.cpp
42

It seems like there's a lot of unrelated formatting changes in this file that should not be part of the patch.

Tyker updated this revision to Diff 221166.Sep 21 2019, 4:33 AM
Tyker marked 24 inline comments as done.

Fixed most changes requested by @aaron.ballman
test are currently no valid anymore see comments for why.

clang/include/clang/AST/ASTContext.h
281

when i added APValueCleanups i wasn't aware that there were a generic system to handle this. but with this patch APValue a cleaned up using the generic ASTContext::addDestruction.

clang/include/clang/AST/TextNodeDumper.h
149 ↗(On Diff #217600)

i took a look at the revision. there is a big difference is the quality of output between APValue::dump and APValue::printPretty. i think it is possible to come quite close to printPretty's output even without the ASTContext. this would require having a default PrintingPolicy and improving dump

in this patch i was relying on the -ast-dump output for testing. i would need to find an other testing strategy or make the improvement to APValue::dump first.

clang/lib/AST/APValue.cpp
177

when imporing or deserializing, we reserve the space for elements and then import/deserialize element directly in place. so the buffer storing them is not const. that said i saw that the normal construction cast away the const.

764

this function gives access to non-const internal data. this function is private so the impact is quite limited.

Tyker updated this revision to Diff 221169.Sep 21 2019, 5:29 AM
Tyker marked 2 inline comments as done.
Tyker added inline comments.
clang/lib/AST/APValue.cpp
177

never mind this change wasn't needed.

aaron.ballman added inline comments.Sep 23 2019, 8:24 AM
clang/include/clang/AST/APValue.h
517

This was marked as done but is still an issue.

537–540

Rather than add this private bit in the middle of the public interface, you can move this to the existing private parts.

609

We're horribly inconsistent in this class, but because the other private member functions go with it, this should probably be GetMemberPointerPathPtr(). Maybe rename the get/setLValue methods from above as well?

clang/include/clang/AST/ASTContext.h
281

I don't see any new calls to addDestruction() though. Have I missed something?

clang/include/clang/AST/TextNodeDumper.h
149 ↗(On Diff #217600)

there is a big difference is the quality of output between APValue::dump and APValue::printPretty.

Yes, there is.

i think it is possible to come quite close to printPretty's output even without the ASTContext. this would require having a default PrintingPolicy and improving dump

That would be much-appreciated! When I looked at it, it seemed like it may not be plausible because Stmt does not track which ASTContext it is associated with the same way that Decl does, and changing that seemed likely to cause a huge amount of interface churn.

in this patch i was relying on the -ast-dump output for testing. i would need to find an other testing strategy or make the improvement to APValue::dump first.

The issue resolved by r372323 was that we would crash on certain kinds of AST dumps. Specifically, the default AST dumper is often used during a debugging session to dump AST node information within the debugger. It was trivial to get that to crash before r372323, but with that revision, we no longer crash but get slightly uglier output (which is acceptable because it's still human-readable output).

I'm sorry for causing extra pain for you here, but I didn't want the fix from this review to accidentally become an enshrined part of the API because it's very easy to forget about this use case when working on AST dumping functionality.

clang/lib/AST/APValue.cpp
764

That makes it harder to call this helper from a constant context. I think there should be overloads (one const, one not) to handle this.

clang/test/ASTMerge/APValue/APValue.cpp
2

Can remove the spurious newline. Also, it seems this file was added with svn properties, was that intentional (we don't usually do that, FWIW)?

3–4

no need for -x c++ is there? This is already a C++ compilation unit.

29

Are you planning to address this in this patch? Also, I think it's FixedPoint and not FixePoint.

clang/test/PCH/APValue.cpp
1 ↗(On Diff #221169)

Spurious newline.

2 ↗(On Diff #221169)

-x c++ ?

It's really unfortunate that these test files are identical copies in different directories.

28 ↗(On Diff #221169)

Same comment here.

Tyker updated this revision to Diff 221384.Sep 23 2019, 12:28 PM
Tyker marked 12 inline comments as done.
Tyker retitled this revision from [clang] Improve Serialization/Imporing of APValues to [clang] Improve Serialization/Imporing/Dumping of APValues.
Tyker edited the summary of this revision. (Show Details)

fixed some changes.
see comments for others.

clang/include/clang/AST/APValue.h
517

sorry

clang/test/PCH/APValue.cpp
2 ↗(On Diff #221169)

they are almost the same. the second run line is slightly different. i had a version with both run line in the same file. but martong was worried that people running partial test would only not get all test relevant for what they were testing.

after through. ASTMerge requires both serialization and importing so it would probably be sufficient ?

Tyker added inline comments.Sep 23 2019, 12:29 PM
clang/include/clang/AST/APValue.h
609

We're horribly inconsistent in this class

this class has many flaws. but is far too broadly used to fix.

clang/include/clang/AST/ASTContext.h
281

the modification to use addDestruction() was made in a previous revision (https://reviews.llvm.org/D63376).
the use is currently on master in ConstantExpr::MoveIntoResult in the RSK_APValue case of the switch.
this is just a removing an unused member.

clang/include/clang/AST/TextNodeDumper.h
149 ↗(On Diff #217600)

no worries, i wrote the original bug. i added APValue::dumpPretty which has almost the same output as APValue::printPretty but doesn't need an ASTContext. and is used for TextNodeDumper.

clang/lib/AST/APValue.cpp
764

this helper is not intended to be used outside of importing and serialization. it is logically part of initialization.
normal users are intended to use ArrayRef<APValue::LValuePathEntry> APValue::getLValuePath() const

clang/test/ASTMerge/APValue/APValue.cpp
2

it wasn't intentional, i added via git add i don't think i did anything weird. is it a problem ?

3–4

i don't know if it is normal. but i am getting an error hen i am not using -x c++
error: invalid argument '-std=gnu++2a' not allowed with 'C'

29

i don't intend to add them in this patch or subsequent patches. i don't know how to use the features that have these representations, i don't even know if they can be stored stored in that AST. so this is untested code.
that said theses representations aren't complex. the imporing for FixePoint, ComplexInt, ComplexFloat is a no-op and for AddrLabelDiff it is trivial. for serialization, I can put an llvm_unreachable to mark them as untested if you want ?

aaron.ballman marked an inline comment as done.Sep 23 2019, 1:02 PM
aaron.ballman added inline comments.
clang/include/clang/AST/APValue.h
609

Agreed -- I wasn't suggesting to fix the whole class, but just the new APIs that we add to the class. It looks like the private functions most consistently use a capital letter in this class, unfortunately. Best to stick with the local convention when in conflict.

clang/include/clang/AST/ASTContext.h
281

Ahhh, thank you for the explanation, I was missing that context.

clang/include/clang/AST/PrettyPrinter.h
203

Wether -> Whether

clang/lib/AST/APValue.cpp
537

Since you're touching the code anyway, this can be const auto *.

599

Are you sure this doesn't change behavior? See the implementation of ASTContext::getAsArrayType(). Same question applies below.

614

const auto * and same question about behavior changes.

764

Nothing about this API suggests that. The name looks like a generic getter. Perhaps a more descriptive name and some comments would help?

clang/test/ASTMerge/APValue/APValue.cpp
2

No idea; I'm on a platform where file modes are ignored. You should probably drop the svn property.

3–4

There's no %s on that line for the source file, which is why you get that diagnostic. I'm not certain what that RUN line does, actually -- it does an AST merge with... nothing... and then prints it out?

If that's intended, then you only need the -x c++ on that one RUN line.

29

I don't think llvm_unreachable makes a whole lot of sense unless the code is truly unreachable because there's no way to get an AST with that representation. By code inspection, the code looks reasonable but it does make me a bit uncomfortable to adopt it without tests. I suppose the FIXME is a reasonable compromise in this case, but if you have some spare cycles to investigate ways to get those representations, it would be appreciated.

Tyker updated this revision to Diff 221568.Sep 24 2019, 11:57 AM
Tyker marked 7 inline comments as done.

fixed most comments

clang/lib/AST/APValue.cpp
599

i ran the test suite after the change it there wasn't any test failures. but the test on dumping APValue are probably not as thorough as we would like them to be.
from analysis of ASTContext::getAsArrayType() the only effect i see on the element type is de-sugaring and canonicalization which shouldn't affect correctness of the output. de-sugaring requires the ASTContext but canonicalization doesn't.

i think the best way the have higher confidence is to ask rsmith what he thinks.

clang/test/ASTMerge/APValue/APValue.cpp
29

the reason i proposed llvm_unreachable was because it passes the tests and prevents future developer from depending on the code that depend on it assuming it works.

aaron.ballman added inline comments.Sep 25 2019, 8:52 AM
clang/include/clang/AST/APValue.h
613

ReserveVector

620

SetLValueEmptyPath

clang/lib/AST/APValue.cpp
599

Yeah, I doubt we have good test coverage for all the various behaviors here. I was wondering if the qualifiers bit was handled properly with a simple cast. @rsmith is a good person to weigh in.

clang/test/ASTMerge/APValue/APValue.cpp
29

We typically only use llvm_unreachable for situations where we believe the code path is impossible to reach, which is why I think that's the wrong approach. We could use an assertion to test the theory, however.

Tyker updated this revision to Diff 222169.Sep 27 2019, 7:18 AM
Tyker marked 3 inline comments as done.

made renamings

rsmith added inline comments.Sep 27 2019, 11:53 AM
clang/lib/AST/Expr.cpp
325

Can you use llvm_unreachable here? (Are there cases where we use RSK_None and then later find we actually have a value to store into the ConstantExpr?)

clang/lib/Serialization/ASTReader.cpp
9635

This is problematic.

ReadExpr will read a new copy of the expression, creating a distinct object. But in the case where we reach this when deserializing (for a MaterializeTemporaryExpr), we need to refer to the existing MaterializeTemporaryExpr in the initializer of its lifetime-extending declaration. We will also need to serialize the ASTContext's MaterializedTemporaryValues collection so that the temporaries lifetime-extended in a constant initializer get properly handled.

That all sounds very messy, so I think we should reconsider the model that we use for lifetime-extended materialized temporaries. As a half-baked idea:

  • When we lifetime-extend a temporary, create a MaterializedTemporaryDecl to hold its value, and modify MaterializeTemporaryExpr to refer to the MaterializedTemporaryDecl rather than to just hold the subexpression for the temporary.
  • Change the LValueBase representation to denote the declaration rather than the expression.
  • Store the constant evaluated value for a materialized temporary on the MaterializedTemporaryDecl rather than on a side-table in the ASTContext.

With that done, we should verify that all remaining Expr*s used as LValueBases are either only transiently used during evaluation or don't have these kinds of identity problems.

Tyker marked 10 inline comments as done.Oct 6 2019, 2:34 AM

update done tasks.

clang/lib/AST/APValue.cpp
599

the original question we had is whether it is correct to replace Ctx.ASTContext::getAsArrayType(ElemTy) by cast<ArrayType>(ElemTy.getCanonicalType()) in this context and the other comment below.

clang/lib/AST/Expr.cpp
325

we can put llvm_unreachable in the switch because of if (!Value.hasValue()) above the switch but we can't remove if (!Value.hasValue()).
all cases i have seen where if (!Value.hasValue()) is taken occur after a semantic error occured.

clang/lib/Serialization/ASTReader.cpp
9635

Would it be possible to adapt serialization/deserialization so that they make sure that MaterializeTemporaryExpr are unique.
by:

  • When serializing MaterializeTemporaryExpr serialize a key obtained from the pointer to the expression as it is unique.
  • When deserializing MaterializeTemporaryExpr deserializing the key, and than have a cache for previously deserialized expression that need to be unique.

This would make easier adding new Expr that require uniqueness and seem less complicated.
What do you think ?

Tyker marked an inline comment as done.Oct 23 2019, 4:04 PM
Tyker added inline comments.
clang/lib/Serialization/ASTReader.cpp
9635

i added a review that does the refactoring https://reviews.llvm.org/D69360.

Tyker added a comment.Dec 10 2019, 1:03 PM

now that the issue with uniqueness of expressions is solved. we should be able to keep going on that review @rsmith.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D63960 should be i think close to completion. so maybe for testing i could use immediate invocation as a source for ConstantExpr instead of the code i added to make constexpr variables emit ConstantExpr ?

Tyker updated this revision to Diff 236707.Jan 7 2020, 3:36 PM

rebased

Are we at a point where we can test this now? Perhaps by adding an assert in codegen that we always have an evaluated value for any constexpr variable that we emit?

clang/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp
11741–11743

This may create additional AST nodes outside the ConstantExpr, which VarDecl::evaluateValue is not expecting to see (in particular, if we have cleanups for the initializer). Should the ConstantExpr go outside those nodes rather than inside?

clang/lib/Serialization/ASTReader.cpp
9635

What are the cases for which we still encounter expressions as lvalue bases during serialization? I think all the other ones should be OK, but maybe there's another interesting one we've overlooked.

Tyker updated this revision to Diff 282682.EditedAug 3 2020, 10:50 AM
Tyker edited the summary of this revision. (Show Details)

Sorry for the delay

Are we at a point where we can test this now?

Yes we can use consteval to test it. so i removed changes to constexpr AST modling.

i split this path into 2 this path deal with serialization and importing, the other (D85144) improves the dumping of APValues to properly test this patch

Tyker retitled this revision from [clang] Improve Serialization/Imporing/Dumping of APValues to [clang] Improve Serialization/Imporing of APValues.Aug 3 2020, 10:55 AM
Tyker edited the summary of this revision. (Show Details)
Tyker added inline comments.Aug 3 2020, 10:57 AM
clang/lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp
11741–11743

i removed the changes to the storage of constexpr values since it was only used for testing purposes and we can now use consteval for that purpose.

clang/lib/Serialization/ASTReader.cpp
9635

the 2 example that come to mind are string literals and type_info there are probably more.

Tyker updated this revision to Diff 283985.Aug 7 2020, 12:19 PM

rebased

rsmith added inline comments.Sep 28 2020, 12:13 AM
clang/include/clang/AST/APValue.h
610–612

Maybe something like this?

613

This function changes the size of the vector, so Reserve doesn't seem right to me. How about setVectorUninit? (Generally including Uninit in the names of the setters that leave things uninitialized would be useful.)

Also, instead of exposing GetInternal functions, how about adding functions that return a MutableArrayRef holding the array:

MutableArrayRef<APValue> setVectorUninit(unsigned N);
MutableArrayRef<LValuePathEntry> setLValueUninit(LValueBase B, const CharUnits &O, unsigned Size, bool OnePastTheEnd, bool IsNullPtr);
MutableArrayRef<const CXXRecordDecl*> MakeMemberPointerUninit(const ValueDecl *Member, bool IsDerivedMember, unsigned Size);

(It would be nice if MakeMemberPointer weren't so inconsistent with everything else this class does. But this whole interface is a mess.)

clang/lib/AST/APValue.cpp
833–834

Similarly maybe mentioning Uninit here would be useful.

clang/lib/AST/ASTImporter.cpp
6528–6531

Delete this commented-out code, please.

8866

We want the path in an APValue to be canonical, but importing a canonical decl might result in a non-canonical decl.

8886–8887

If you're intentionally not handling DynamicAllocLValue here (because those should always be transient), a comment to that effect would be useful.

8927
clang/lib/Serialization/ASTReader.cpp
9558–9679

You can assume here (and assert in the writer) that both floats in a ComplexFloat have the same fltSemantics.

9614
Tyker updated this revision to Diff 295626.Oct 1 2020, 10:55 AM
Tyker marked 15 inline comments as done.

addressed comments

Tyker added inline comments.Oct 1 2020, 10:56 AM
clang/lib/AST/ASTImporter.cpp
8866

but importing a canonical decl might result in a non-canonical decl.

this is a quite surprising behavior.

8886–8887

i added an asserts with a message.

rsmith accepted this revision.Oct 1 2020, 9:48 PM

Looks great, thanks!

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Oct 1 2020, 9:48 PM
martong requested changes to this revision.Oct 2 2020, 6:44 AM

Sorry for the late review, I just noticed something which is not a logical error, but we could make the ASTImporter code much cleaner.

clang/lib/AST/ASTImporter.cpp
8906–8917

A series of importChecked would result in a much cleaner code by omitting the second check. Also, instead of breaking out from the switch we can immediately return with the error.

This applies for the other cases where there are more import calls after each other (e.g. AddrLabelDiff, Union, ...).

Giving it more thought, you could use importChecked instead of Import everywhere in this function (for consistency).

This revision now requires changes to proceed.Oct 2 2020, 6:44 AM
martong added inline comments.Oct 2 2020, 7:01 AM
clang/lib/AST/ASTImporter.cpp
8866

but importing a canonical decl might result in a non-canonical decl.

this is a quite surprising behavior.

If you already have an existing redecl chain in the destination ASTContext (let's say A->B->C, A is the canonical decl), then importing a canonical decl (let's say D) would result an A->B->C->D' chain. Where D' is the imported version of D.

Reverse ping: I have a patch implementing class type non-type template parameters that's blocked on this landing. If you won't have time to address @martong's comments soon, do you mind if I take this over and land it?

Reverse ping: I have a patch implementing class type non-type template parameters that's blocked on this landing. If you won't have time to address @martong's comments soon, do you mind if I take this over and land it?

It is okay for me to commit this patch in its current state. The changes I suggested could result in a cleaner code, but I can do those changes after we land this.

Tyker updated this revision to Diff 298318.Oct 15 2020, 12:27 AM

try to apply martongs's suggestions.

Tyker added a comment.EditedOct 15 2020, 12:28 AM

Reverse ping: I have a patch implementing class type non-type template parameters

that's blocked on this landing. If you won't have time to address @martong's comments soon, do you mind if I take this over and land it?

nice to see this coming.

It is okay for me to commit this patch in its current state. The changes I suggested could result in a cleaner code, but I can do those changes after we land this.

i couldn't apply martong's suggestion completely because importChecked is part of ASTNodeImporter not ASTImporter, but cleaned up some code.
but the "real" blocker is that the testing depends on D85144 for testing.
we could land it marking the tests XFAIL and correct it when dumping improvements arrive.

Reverse ping: I have a patch implementing class type non-type template parameters

that's blocked on this landing. If you won't have time to address @martong's comments soon, do you mind if I take this over and land it?

nice to see this coming.

It is okay for me to commit this patch in its current state. The changes I suggested could result in a cleaner code, but I can do those changes after we land this.

i couldn't apply martong's suggestion completely because importChecked is part of ASTNodeImporter not ASTImporter, but cleaned up some code.

This indicates that the newly added Import(APValue *) function should be part of the ASTNodeImporter. I came up with a draft patch on top of your patch:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/ac738cf854bdafa83a23c400bd5b2a90520566f9
You can see, this way we can eliminate some redundant ifs and casts.

but the "real" blocker is that the testing depends on D85144 for testing.
we could land it marking the tests XFAIL and correct it when dumping improvements arrive.

I'd be OK with that. We'll have coverage for this in various forms landing pretty soon.

This revision was not accepted when it landed; it landed in state Needs Review.Oct 21 2020, 10:04 AM
This revision was landed with ongoing or failed builds.
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.

but the "real" blocker is that the testing depends on D85144 for testing.
we could land it marking the tests XFAIL and correct it when dumping improvements arrive.

I'd be OK with that. We'll have coverage for this in various forms landing pretty soon.

i appiled martong's patch and landed it marking the test as XFAIL.