The following code gives different output when running the release inside Visual Studio, and running the release outside Visual Studio. I'm using Visual Studio 2008 and targeting .NET 3.5. I've also tried .NET 3.5 SP1.
When running outside Visual Studio, the JIT should kick in. Either (a) there's something subtle going on with C# that I'm missing or (b) the JIT is actually in error. I'm doubtful that the JIT can go wrong, but I'm running out of other possiblities...
Output when running inside Visual Studio:
0 0,
0 1,
1 0,
1 1,
Output when running release outside of Visual Studio:
0 2,
0 2,
1 2,
1 2,
What is the reason?
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;
using System.Text;
namespace Test
{
struct IntVec
{
public int x;
public int y;
}
interface IDoSomething
{
void Do(IntVec o);
}
class DoSomething : IDoSomething
{
public void Do(IntVec o)
{
Console.WriteLine(o.x.ToString() + " " + o.y.ToString()+",");
}
}
class Program
{
static void Test(IDoSomething oDoesSomething)
{
IntVec oVec = new IntVec();
for (oVec.x = 0; oVec.x < 2; oVec.x++)
{
for (oVec.y = 0; oVec.y < 2; oVec.y++)
{
oDoesSomething.Do(oVec);
}
}
}
static void Main(string[] args)
{
Test(new DoSomething());
Console.ReadLine();
}
}
}
Source: Tips4all, CCNA FINAL EXAM
It is a JIT optimizer bug. It is unrolling the inner loop but not updating the oVec.y value properly:
ReplyDeletefor (oVec.x = 0; oVec.x < 2; oVec.x++) {
0000000a xor esi,esi ; oVec.x = 0
for (oVec.y = 0; oVec.y < 2; oVec.y++) {
0000000c mov edi,2 ; oVec.y = 2, WRONG!
oDoesSomething.Do(oVec);
00000011 push edi
00000012 push esi
00000013 mov ecx,ebx
00000015 call dword ptr ds:[00170210h] ; first unrolled call
0000001b push edi ; WRONG! does not increment oVec.y
0000001c push esi
0000001d mov ecx,ebx
0000001f call dword ptr ds:[00170210h] ; second unrolled call
for (oVec.x = 0; oVec.x < 2; oVec.x++) {
00000025 inc esi
00000026 cmp esi,2
00000029 jl 0000000C
The bug disappears when you let oVec.y increment to 4, that's too many calls to unroll.
One workaround is this:
for (int x = 0; x < 2; x++) {
for (int y = 0; y < 2; y++) {
oDoesSomething.Do(new IntVec(x, y));
}
}
I believe this is in a genuine JIT compilation bug. I would report it to Microsoft and see what they say. Interestingly, I found that the x64 JIT does not have the same problem.
ReplyDeleteHere is my reading of the x86 JIT.
// save context
00000000 push ebp
00000001 mov ebp,esp
00000003 push edi
00000004 push esi
00000005 push ebx
// put oDoesSomething pointer in ebx
00000006 mov ebx,ecx
// zero out edi, this will store y
00000008 xor edi,edi
// zero out esi, this will store x
0000000a xor esi,esi
// NOTE: the inner loop is unrolled here.
// set y to 2
0000000c mov edi,2
// call oDoesSomething.DoSomething(x, y) -- y is always 2!?!
00000011 push edi
00000012 push esi
00000013 mov ecx,ebx
00000015 call dword ptr ds:[002F0010h]
// call oDoesSomething.DoSomething(x, y) -- y is always 2?!?!
0000001b push edi
0000001c push esi
0000001d mov ecx,ebx
0000001f call dword ptr ds:[002F0010h]
// increment x
00000025 inc esi
// loop back to 0000000C if x < 2
00000026 cmp esi,2
00000029 jl 0000000C
// restore context and return
0000002b pop ebx
0000002c pop esi
0000002d pop edi
0000002e pop ebp
0000002f ret
This looks like an optimization gone bad to me...
I copied your code into a new Console App.
ReplyDeleteDebug Build
Correct output with both debugger and no debugger
Switched to Release Build
Again, correct output both times
Created a new x86 configuration (I'm on running X64 Windows 2008 and was using 'Any CPU')
Debug Build
Got the correct output both F5 and CTRL+F5
Release Build
Correct output with Debugger attached
No debugger - Got the incorrect output
So it is the x86 JIT incorrectly generating the code. Have deleted my original text about reordering of loops etc. A few other answers on here have confirmed that the JIT is unwinding the loop incorrectly when on x86.
To fix the problem you can change the declaration of IntVec to a class and it works in all flavours.
Think this needs to go on MS Connect....
-1 to Microsoft!
The reason why this bug doesn't reproduce when you run the program with an attached debugger, is because by default VS will force the JIT not to use optimizations when compiling the CIL (since that would make the task of actually debugging the code to be much harder .. and actually impossible at times).
ReplyDelete