JIT: Disable recursive tailcall to loop opt in OSR methods#113625
Merged
jakobbotsch merged 1 commit intodotnet:mainfrom Mar 18, 2025
Merged
JIT: Disable recursive tailcall to loop opt in OSR methods#113625jakobbotsch merged 1 commit intodotnet:mainfrom
jakobbotsch merged 1 commit intodotnet:mainfrom
Conversation
OSR is meant to be used when we can't escape, but these tailcalls are natural points where we're actually able to escape. So prefer call counting + tiering + potential transition into the tier 1 code in these situations.
ghost
added
the
area-CodeGen-coreclr
Member
Author
|
cc @dotnet/jit-contrib PTAL @AndyAyersMS |
AndyAyersMS
approved these changes
Mar 18, 2025
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
OSR is meant to be used when we can't escape, but these tailcalls are natural points where we're actually able to escape. So prefer call counting + tiering + potential transition into the tier 1 code in these situations.
This also happens to fix #111625, although I think the underlying problem is more of a phase ordering issue and might exist even outside OSR methods. I've opened #113623 to investigate this closer.