From 26a029d407be480d791972afb5975cf62c9360a6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Daniel Baumann Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2024 02:47:55 +0200 Subject: Adding upstream version 124.0.1. Signed-off-by: Daniel Baumann --- js/src/jit-test/tests/ion/monomorphic-inlining.js | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+) create mode 100644 js/src/jit-test/tests/ion/monomorphic-inlining.js (limited to 'js/src/jit-test/tests/ion/monomorphic-inlining.js') diff --git a/js/src/jit-test/tests/ion/monomorphic-inlining.js b/js/src/jit-test/tests/ion/monomorphic-inlining.js new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..608d10917d --- /dev/null +++ b/js/src/jit-test/tests/ion/monomorphic-inlining.js @@ -0,0 +1,42 @@ +// |jit-test| --ion-offthread-compile=off; + +function foo(f, a, b) { + return f(a, b); +} + +function bar(a, b) { + let result = a + b; + if (result >= fns.length) { + return b + a; + } + return result; +} + +function baz(a, b) { + return a + b; +} + +let fns = []; + +// This is pretty fiddly. What we are trying to test here is a specific path +// in the bailout code which needs to know which ICScript to load, and has to +// decide between the script's own ICScript, or the trial-inlined ICScript +// which belongs to the outer script. It uses the ICFallbackStub's +// trialInliningState to make this decision, which can change out from +// underneath us if the inlined call fails. So what were doing here is getting +// into a state where we've monomorphic inlined a function, and gone to Ion +// with it. We then cause the inlined call to fail by calling a function which +// doesn't match what we expect, which transitions us to a failed +// trialInliningState. We then will bail out *inside* bar, due to the +// previously unseen inside of the result >= fns.length check, exercising the +// bailout code in question. +for (let i = 0; i < 2000; i++) { + fns.push(bar); +} + +fns.push(baz); +fns.push(bar); + +for (let i = 0; i < fns.length; i++) { + assertEq(foo(fns[i], i, 1), i + 1); +} -- cgit v1.2.3