Re: [Help-smalltalk] [PATCH] Process>>#isSuspendedInCCall

[Holger Hans Peter Freyther]

On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 05:47:49PM +0200, Gwenaël Casaccio wrote:

Hi,

sorry for the delay in reviewing.

> Here is the patch: I've add one slot to ContextPart (ctxtFlags) and
> thisContext is tagged while
> being reentrant. And few primitives (compile, ccall) are extended to tag the
> context.

The C-Call/primitive will only be invoked from a method context
in normal operation. What about just adding the ctxFlags to the
methodContext then?

>      asyncCall [
> +     <category: 'calling'>
> +
>       "Perform the call-out for the function represented by the receiver.
>        The arguments (and the receiver if one of the arguments has type
>        #self or #selfSmalltalk) are taken from the parent context.
> @@ -140,7 +142,7 @@ to perform the actual call-out to C routines.'>
>       ^self isValid 
>           ifFalse: 
>               [SystemExceptions.CInterfaceError signal: 'Invalid C call-out ' 
> , self name]
> -         ifTrue: [self asyncCallNoRetryFrom: thisContext parentContext]
> +         ifTrue: [self asyncCallNoRetryFrom: thisContext parentContext ]
>      ]

unrelated change just creating distraction. :)

> @@ -522,6 +525,7 @@ _gst_interpret (OOP processOOP)
>  
>  monitor_byte_codes:
>    SET_EXCEPT_FLAG (false);
> +  finish_debugging_step = false;
>  
>    /* First, deal with any async signals.  */
>    if (async_queue_enabled)
> @@ -540,6 +544,7 @@ monitor_byte_codes:
>          {
>            _gst_async_signal (single_step_semaphore);
>            single_step_semaphore = NULL;
> +          finish_debugging_step = true;
>          }

are you mixing things here? The 'tagging' of a process being
debugged might be good in a separate patch? We will also need
to add this to the JIT.


> +/* Anwser whether execution is going to be reentrant. */
> +#define MCF_IS_REENTRANT              2

What does this mean? 

> +  this_context = (gst_method_context) OOP_TO_OBJ (_gst_this_context_oop);
> +  this_context->ctxtFlags |= MCF_IS_REENTRANT;
> +
>    oop2 = POP_OOP ();
>    oop1 = POP_OOP ();
>    if (IS_CLASS (oop2, _gst_string_class))
> @@ -5231,6 +5235,8 @@ primitive VMpr_Behavior_primCompile [succeed]
>  
>    if (interrupted)
>      stop_execution ();
> +  else
> +    this_context->ctxtFlags &= ~MCF_IS_REENTRANT;

this and most of the errors look unbalanced. So if the function
is re-entered the first one to leave will unset this flag? Is
this the intention? What does it buy us?