Determinism for NativeAOT #73931
Labels
Milestone
Comments
3 tasks
MichalStrehovsky
referenced
this issue
in MichalStrehovsky/runtime
Mar 24, 2022
I was trying to repro dotnet#66191 and assumed determinism is the root cause. I used `CoreRT_DeterminismSeed` to perturb the dependency node evaluation and it found differences. Now, I don't think the differences really matter. We already seem to be deterministic in the multithreaded compilation (the outputs are always the same no matter how many times I try). `CoreRT_DeterminismSeed` perturbs the order in which node dependencies are evaluated and that exposes more ordering issues than we practically have. In normal multithreaded compilation we grab nodes in different order from the `NodeFactory` as part of method compilation, but the order in which those nodes are evaluated is still fixed. This means the nodes we grabbed are still getting marked in a deterministic order and we get stable ordering even without an explicit sort in this spot. But maybe as part of https://github.com/dotnet/runtimelab/issues/1631 we should enable `CoreRT_Determinism` in our testing and for that we need this extra sorting.
jkotas
referenced
this issue
Mar 25, 2022
I was trying to repro #66191 and assumed determinism is the root cause. I used `CoreRT_DeterminismSeed` to perturb the dependency node evaluation and it found differences. Now, I don't think the differences really matter. We already seem to be deterministic in the multithreaded compilation (the outputs are always the same no matter how many times I try). `CoreRT_DeterminismSeed` perturbs the order in which node dependencies are evaluated and that exposes more ordering issues than we practically have. In normal multithreaded compilation we grab nodes in different order from the `NodeFactory` as part of method compilation, but the order in which those nodes are evaluated is still fixed. This means the nodes we grabbed are still getting marked in a deterministic order and we get stable ordering even without an explicit sort in this spot. But maybe as part of https://github.com/dotnet/runtimelab/issues/1631 we should enable `CoreRT_Determinism` in our testing and for that we need this extra sorting.
radekdoulik
referenced
this issue
in radekdoulik/runtime
Mar 30, 2022
I was trying to repro dotnet#66191 and assumed determinism is the root cause. I used `CoreRT_DeterminismSeed` to perturb the dependency node evaluation and it found differences. Now, I don't think the differences really matter. We already seem to be deterministic in the multithreaded compilation (the outputs are always the same no matter how many times I try). `CoreRT_DeterminismSeed` perturbs the order in which node dependencies are evaluated and that exposes more ordering issues than we practically have. In normal multithreaded compilation we grab nodes in different order from the `NodeFactory` as part of method compilation, but the order in which those nodes are evaluated is still fixed. This means the nodes we grabbed are still getting marked in a deterministic order and we get stable ordering even without an explicit sort in this spot. But maybe as part of https://github.com/dotnet/runtimelab/issues/1631 we should enable `CoreRT_Determinism` in our testing and for that we need this extra sorting.
|
We produce deterministic object files, but the linker then messes it all up with timestamps and GUIDs, so there's well understood diffs in the final output. The VC++ team has been dragging their feet adding support for this: https://developercommunity.visualstudio.com/t/support-for-cls-experimentaldeterministic-becoming/426033 Experimentally adding I'm reluctant adding undocumented link.exe switches to our targets. We need to revisit in 8.0 and we likely need a link.exe feature. I'm starting an email thread. |
|
The diffs are possible to patch out. A tool like this could be used: https://github.com/jasonwhite/ducible (Haven't actually tried) |
|
It was pointed out to me by someone over email that when link.exe is passed a res file, it will run cvtres to generate an obj file with a random name and the random name messes up some of the determinism. So we might need to fix #79634 to help the determinism. We're still limited by what link.exe can do though. |
MichalStrehovsky
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jul 11, 2023
Fixes #79634. To generate Win32 resources, we'd first use an MSBuild task to dump Win32 resources from the input IL module into a `.res` file. We'd then pass the `.res` file to link.exe. Link.exe would then invoke cvtres.exe to convert the `.res` file to `.obj`. Link.exe then links the `.obj` into the final executable. Skip all of this and instead generate the correct object data in the compiler directly. I'm reusing Win32 resource emission logic from crossgen2. It already mostly does the right thing - we just needed to split the `.rsrc` section into `.rsrc$01` and `.rsrc$02` that link.exe expects. The first part has the data directory. The second part has the actual resource data. Contributes to #73931. The cvtres step was actually non-deterministic because it creates an object file in TEMP and embeds this temporary name into the object.
|
Moving to |
MichalStrehovsky
added a commit
to MichalStrehovsky/runtime
that referenced
this issue
Oct 17, 2023
Resolves dotnet#73931. This checks that the result of parallel build is the same as the result of single-threaded build. I'd like to add some more code to this so that there's more junk to compile but don't have a good idea of what to add. `XmlSerializer`? Suggestions welcome.
ghost
added
the
in-pr
MichalStrehovsky
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Nov 10, 2023
Resolves #73931. This checks that the result of parallel build is the same as the result of single-threaded build.
ghost
removed
the
in-pr
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Deterministic binaries should be supported for NativeAOT and we should have tests.
In short, the feature is that identical inputs to the exact same compiler toolchain should produce bit-for-bit identical results.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: