(正向)管道操作员是否可以阻止尾调用优化?

pri*_*tor 17 stack-overflow f# cil tail-recursion tail-call-optimization

对于工作中的参数优化问题,我写了一个遗传算法来找到一些好的设置,因为蛮力解决方案是不可行的.不幸的是,当我早上回来时,大部分时间我都会被送到StackOverflowException.

我已经使用F#已经有一段时间了所以我知道TCO和需要带累加器参数的函数,并且通常使用该形式.

经过大量的搜索,我认为我能够找到触发异常的代码:

breedPopulation alive |> simulate (generation + 1) lastTime ewma
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)

breedPopulation从当前个体中生成新一代alive.然后通过调用开始下一轮/生成simulate.当我看到反汇编(总noob)时,我发现了一些pop和a ret,所以它看起来不像是对我的常规(非尾部)调用.

mov         rcx,qword ptr [rbp+10h]  
mov         rcx,qword ptr [rcx+8]  
mov         rdx,qword ptr [rbp-40h]  
cmp         dword ptr [rcx],ecx  
call        00007FFA3E4905C0  
mov         qword ptr [rbp-0F0h],rax  
mov         r8,qword ptr [rbp-0F0h]  
mov         qword ptr [rbp-80h],r8  
mov         r8,qword ptr [rbp-78h]  
mov         qword ptr [rsp+20h],r8  
mov         r8d,dword ptr [rbp+18h]  
inc         r8d  
mov         rdx,qword ptr [rbp+10h]  
mov         r9,qword ptr [rbp-20h]  
mov         rcx,7FFA3E525960h  
call        00007FFA3E4A5040  
mov         qword ptr [rbp-0F8h],rax  
mov         rcx,qword ptr [rbp-0F8h]  
mov         rdx,qword ptr [rbp-80h]  
mov         rax,qword ptr [rbp-0F8h]  
mov         rax,qword ptr [rax]  
mov         rax,qword ptr [rax+40h]  
call        qword ptr [rax+20h]  
mov         qword ptr [rbp-100h],rax  
mov         rax,qword ptr [rbp-100h]  
lea         rsp,[rbp-10h]  
pop         rsi  
pop         rdi  
pop         rbp  
ret
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)

丢弃管道操作员并将繁殖置于正常参数位置后,拆卸是不同的.

//    simulate (generation + 1) lastTime ewma (breedPopulation alive)
mov         ecx,dword ptr [rbp+18h]  
inc         ecx  
mov         dword ptr [rbp-30h],ecx  
mov         rcx,qword ptr [rbp-20h]  
mov         qword ptr [rbp-38h],rcx  
mov         rcx,qword ptr [rbp-80h]  
mov         qword ptr [rbp-0F0h],rcx  
mov         rcx,qword ptr [rbp+10h]  
mov         rcx,qword ptr [rcx+8]  
mov         rdx,qword ptr [rbp-48h]  
cmp         dword ptr [rcx],ecx  
call        00007FFA3E4605C0  
mov         qword ptr [rbp-0F8h],rax  
mov         rax,qword ptr [rbp-0F8h]  
mov         qword ptr [rbp+30h],rax  
mov         rax,qword ptr [rbp-0F0h]  
mov         qword ptr [rbp+28h],rax  
mov         rax,qword ptr [rbp-38h]  
mov         qword ptr [rbp+20h],rax  
mov         eax,dword ptr [rbp-30h]  
mov         dword ptr [rbp+18h],eax  
nop  
jmp         00007FFA3E47585B
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)

这肯定是短暂的,最后jmp甚至更好的尾巴调用.

因此,我想知道是否以及为什么|>似乎是问题,什么时候它确实有所作为 - 毕竟,这是多年来它第一次咬我.在什么情况下会发生什么,我们需要注意什么?


更新:Guy指出我的列表不是IL但是汇编之后,我首先重写了这个问题.这是我在ILSpy中发现的:

使用|>运算符

看看反编译的C#,代码似乎在两者之间来回跳转

internal static FSharpFunc<Types.Genome[], System.Tuple<System.Tuple<float, float>, LbpArea[]>[]> simulate@265-1(Universe x, System.Threading.ManualResetEvent pleaseStop, int generation, System.DateTime lastTime, FSharpOption<double> ewma)
{
    return new $Universe.simulate@267-2(x, pleaseStop, generation, lastTime, ewma);
}
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)

// internal class simulate@267-2
public override System.Tuple<System.Tuple<float, float>, LbpArea[]>[] Invoke(Types.Genome[] population)
{
    LbpArea[][] array = ArrayModule.Parallel.Map<Types.Genome, LbpArea[]>(this.x.genomeToArray, population);
    FSharpFunc<System.Tuple<System.Tuple<float, float>, LbpArea[]>, float> accessFitness = this.x.accessFitness;
    System.Tuple<System.Tuple<float, float>, LbpArea[]>[] array2 = ArrayModule.Filter<System.Tuple<System.Tuple<float, float>, LbpArea[]>>(new $Universe.alive@274(accessFitness), ArrayModule.Parallel.Map<LbpArea[], System.Tuple<System.Tuple<float, float>, LbpArea[]>>(new $Universe.alive@273-1(this.x), array));
    if (array2 == null)
    {
        throw new System.ArgumentNullException("array");
    }
    System.Tuple<System.Tuple<float, float>, LbpArea[]>[] array3 = ArrayModule.SortWith<System.Tuple<System.Tuple<float, float>, LbpArea[]>>(new $Universe.alive@275-2(), array2);
    this.x.Population = array3;
    System.Tuple<System.DateTime, FSharpOption<double>> tuple = this.x.printProgress<float, LbpArea[]>(this.lastTime, this.ewma, this.generation, array3);
    System.DateTime item = tuple.Item1;
    FSharpOption<double> item2 = tuple.Item2;
    if (this.pleaseStop.WaitOne(0))
    {
        return array3;
    }
    Types.Genome[] func = this.x.breedPopulation(array3);
    return $Universe.simulate@265-1(this.x, this.pleaseStop, this.generation + 1, item, item2).Invoke(func);
}
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)

在IL的new通话中,没有tail.找到操作.另一方面,Invoke读取的最后一行的IL

IL_00d3: call class [FSharp.Core]Microsoft.FSharp.Core.FSharpFunc`2<class BioID.GeneticLbp.Types/Genome[], class [mscorlib]System.Tuple`2<class [mscorlib]System.Tuple`2<float32, float32>, valuetype [BioID.Operations.Biometrics]BioID.Operations.Biometrics.LbpArea[]>[]> '<StartupCode$BioID-GeneticLbp>.$Universe'::'simulate@265-1'(class BioID.GeneticLbp.Universe, class [mscorlib]System.Threading.ManualResetEvent, int32, valuetype [mscorlib]System.DateTime, class [FSharp.Core]Microsoft.FSharp.Core.FSharpOption`1<float64>)
IL_00d8: ldloc.s 7
IL_00da: tail.
IL_00dc: callvirt instance !1 class [FSharp.Core]Microsoft.FSharp.Core.FSharpFunc`2<class BioID.GeneticLbp.Types/Genome[], class [mscorlib]System.Tuple`2<class [mscorlib]System.Tuple`2<float32, float32>, valuetype [BioID.Operations.Biometrics]BioID.Operations.Biometrics.LbpArea[]>[]>::Invoke(!0)
IL_00e1: ret
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)

我不知道该怎么做.

没有|>运算符

另一个版本确实非常不同.从...开始

internal static System.Tuple<System.Tuple<float, float>, LbpArea[]>[] simulate@264(Universe x, System.Threading.ManualResetEvent pleaseStop, Unit unitVar0)
{
    FSharpFunc<int, FSharpFunc<System.DateTime, FSharpFunc<FSharpOption<double>, FSharpFunc<Types.Genome[], System.Tuple<System.Tuple<float, float>, LbpArea[]>[]>>>> fSharpFunc = new $Universe.simulate@265-2(x, pleaseStop);
    (($Universe.simulate@265-2)fSharpFunc).x = x;
    (($Universe.simulate@265-2)fSharpFunc).pleaseStop = pleaseStop;
    System.Tuple<System.Tuple<float, float>, LbpArea[]>[] population = x.Population;
    Types.Genome[] func;
    if (population != null && population.Length == 0)
    {
        func = x.lengthRandomlyIncreasing(x.laws@53.PopulationSize@);
        return FSharpFunc<int, System.DateTime>.InvokeFast<FSharpOption<double>, FSharpFunc<Types.Genome[], System.Tuple<System.Tuple<float, float>, LbpArea[]>[]>>(fSharpFunc, 0, System.DateTime.Now, null).Invoke(func);
    }
    FSharpFunc<LbpArea[], Types.Genome> arrayToGenome = x.arrayToGenome;
    func = ArrayModule.Parallel.Map<System.Tuple<System.Tuple<float, float>, LbpArea[]>, Types.Genome>(new $Universe.simulate@296-3(arrayToGenome), population);
    return FSharpFunc<int, System.DateTime>.InvokeFast<FSharpOption<double>, FSharpFunc<Types.Genome[], System.Tuple<System.Tuple<float, float>, LbpArea[]>[]>>(fSharpFunc, 0, System.DateTime.Now, null).Invoke(func);
}
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)

它去了

// internal class simulate@265-2
public override System.Tuple<System.Tuple<float, float>, LbpArea[]>[] Invoke(int generation, System.DateTime lastTime, FSharpOption<double> ewma, Types.Genome[] population)
{
    return $Universe.simulate@265-1(this.x, this.pleaseStop, generation, lastTime, ewma, population);
}
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)

最后

internal static System.Tuple<System.Tuple<float, float>, LbpArea[]>[] simulate@265-1(Universe x, System.Threading.ManualResetEvent pleaseStop, int generation, System.DateTime lastTime, FSharpOption<double> ewma, Types.Genome[] population)
{
    while (true)
    {
        // Playing evolution...
        if (pleaseStop.WaitOne(0))
        {
            return array3;
        }
        // Setting up parameters for next loop...
    }
    throw new System.ArgumentNullException("array");
}
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)

TL;博士

所以,管道操作员的使用大大改变了程序流程.我的猜测是,两个函数之间的来回是最终导致异常的原因.

我已经阅读F#中尾调用,但我不认为它适用于这种情况,因为我不使用一流的函数返回单位为值(在我的F#代码).

所以问题仍然存在:为什么管道操作员在这里会产生这种破坏性影响?我怎么能事先知道/我需要注意什么?


更新2:

您可以在GitHub上找到该示例的简化版本.请亲自看看inline操作员|>改变产量IL,这不是我所期望的.

在减少示例的同时,运气不错,我能够找到异常的真正来源.您可以检查分支以获得更多最小变体.毕竟,它没有任何与该管,但我还是不明白这一点,因为恕我直言,还有就是尾递归.

但我原来的问题仍然存在.我只是增加一个更多.:)

Guy*_*der 8

根据提供的最小情况,如果代码在64位的发布模式下运行,则会因堆栈溢出而失败.如果代码在32位模式下以释放模式运行,则成功.

注意:在32位和64位之间进行选择的选项Prefer 32-bit如下图所示.

增加堆栈大小将导致代码在64位的发布模式下成功.这是通过使用Thread构造函数完成的.

[<EntryPoint>]
let main _ =

    let test () =
        let r = KissRandom()
        let n = r.Normal()
        Seq.item 20000 n |> printfn "%f"

    /// The greatest maximum-stack-size that should be used
    /// with the 'runWithStackFrame' function.
    let STACK_LIMIT = 16777216

    /// Run a function with a custom maximum stack size.
    /// This is necessary for some functions to execute
    /// without raising a StackOverflowException.
    let runWithCustomStackSize maxStackSize fn =
        // Preconditions
        if maxStackSize < 1048576 then
            invalidArg "stackSize" "Functions should not be executed with a \
                maximum stack size of less than 1048576 bytes (1MB)."
        elif maxStackSize > STACK_LIMIT then
            invalidArg "stackSize" "The maximum size of the stack frame should \
                not exceed 16777216 bytes (16MB)."

        /// Holds the return value of the function.
        let result = ref Unchecked.defaultof<'T>

        // Create a thread with the specified maximum stack size,
        // then immediately execute the function on it.
        let thread = System.Threading.Thread ((fun () -> result := fn()), maxStackSize)
        thread.Start ()

        // Wait for the function/thread to finish and return the result.
        thread.Join ()
        !result

    /// Runs a function within a thread which has an enlarged maximum-stack-size.
    let inline runWithEnlargedStack fn =
        runWithCustomStackSize STACK_LIMIT fn


//    test ()       // Fails with stack overflow in 64-bit mode, Release
                    // Runs successfully in 32-bit mode, Release

    runWithEnlargedStack test

    printf "Press any key to exit: "
    System.Console.ReadKey() |> ignore
    printfn ""

    0
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)

此代码来自FSharp-logic-examples,特别是Anh-Dung Phan

虽然我没有检查根本原因,但我怀疑是因为64位项目的大小大于32位项目的大小,即使放入堆栈的项目数量和两个版本的堆栈大小保持不变,项目大小增加会将堆栈所需的内存超过1兆字节限制.

TL; DR

这是一个有趣且具有启发性的问题.有人问我很高兴.

最初问题似乎与使用|>和TCO有关,因为这仍然有价值,我将其留在答案中.我还要感谢OP的回应和帮助,很高兴能帮助那些与你合作而不是反对你的人.

在下面的代码中,它是递归的,并且|>在Visual Studio中以调试模式运行,它会导致StackOverflow.

如果它是从bin\release目录的命令行启动它不会导致StackOverflow.

使用Visual Studio 15社区

[<EntryPoint>]
let main argv = 

    let largeList = 
        printfn "Creating large list"
        [
            for i in 1 .. 100000000 do
                yield i
        ]

    // causes StackOverflow in Debug
    // No StackOverflow in Release
    let sum4 l =
        printfn "testing sum4"
        let rec sumInner4 l acc =
            match l with
            | h::t -> 
                let acc = acc + h
                acc |> sumInner4 t
            | [] -> acc
        sumInner4 l 0

    let result4 = sum4 largeList
    printfn "result4: %A" result4
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)

在Visual Studio工具栏中设置Release或Debug的位置

在此输入图像描述

以及调试模式下项目的选项是

在此输入图像描述

并且在发布模式下的项目选项是

在此输入图像描述

tldr;

在测试过程中,我创建了16个不同的测试,并在调试和发布模式下构建它们,并验证它们是否运行完成或引发堆栈溢出.16个被分解成一组4个,每个4个案例.情况1,5,9,13是否定的并产生堆栈溢出以确保可以创建堆栈溢出.情况2,6,10,14是正的,表明尾调用正在工作并且不会导致堆栈溢出.情况3,7,11,15显示尾部调用,其操作在与尾调用相同的语句中完成,并且是远离测试用例的一个分解|>; 这些工作符合预期.案例4,8,12,16使用|>并显示何时它在调试模式下工作并且不起作用,这对许多人来说可能是一个惊喜.案例1-4和9-12使用表格的功能f x y,案例8-11使用表格的功能f x和案例12-16使用表格的功能f x y z.我最初做了前8个测试用例,但是在Keith的评论之后又做了4个不使用列表但仍然使用from的函数f x y并呈现意外结果,然后再使用表单函数做了4个f x y z.

要运行测试,您必须注释掉除了计划运行的一个测试以及在调试模式下构建一次的所有测试,然后可以在Visual Studio中运行,然后再次在发布模式下构建并运行它.我从命令行运行它以确保我正在运行发布版本.

[<EntryPoint>]
let main argv = 

    let largeList = 
        printfn "Creating large list"
        [
            for i in 1 .. 100000000 do
                yield i
        ]

    // causes StackOverflow in Debug
    // causes StackOverflow in Release
    //   Negative confirmation
    //   A supposed tail call that DOES cause a stack overflow in both debug and release mode
    //   options: f x y
    let sum1 l = 
        printfn "test 01: "
        let rec sum1Inner l acc =
            match l with
            | h::t -> 
                let acc = acc + h
                1 + sum1Inner t acc
            | [] -> acc
        sum1Inner l 0

    // No StackOverflow in Debug
    // No StackOverflow in Release
    //   Positive confirmation
    //   A tail call that DOES NOT cause a stack overflow in both debug and release mode
    //   options: f x y
    let sum2 l =
        printfn "test 02: "
        let rec sum2Inner l acc =
            match l with
            | h::t -> 
                let acc = acc + h
                sum2Inner t acc
            | [] -> acc
        sum2Inner l 0

    // No StackOverflow in Debug
    // No StackOverflow in Release
    //   A test case
    //   options: f x y and no |>
    let sum3 l =
        printfn "test 03: "
        let rec sum3Inner l acc =
            match l with
            | h::t -> 
                sum3Inner t (acc + h)
            | [] -> acc
        sum3Inner l 0

    // causes StackOverflow in Debug
    // No StackOverflow in Release
    //   A test case
    //   options: f x y and |>
    let sum4 l =
        printfn "test 04: "
        let rec sum4Inner l acc =
            match l with
            | h::t -> 
                let acc = acc + h
                acc |> sum4Inner t
            | [] -> acc
        sum4Inner l 0

    // causes StackOverflow in Debug
    // causes StackOverflow in Release
    //   Negative confirmation
    //   A supposed tail call that DOES cause a stack overflow in both debug and release mode
    //   options: f x
    let sum5 () =
        printfn "test 05: "
        let rec sum5Inner x =
            match x with 
            | 10000000 -> x
            | _ -> 
                let acc = x + 1
                1 + sum5Inner acc
        sum5Inner 0

    // No StackOverflow in Debug
    // No StackOverflow in Release
    //   Positive confirmation
    //   A tail call that DOES NOT cause a stack overflow in both debug and release mode
    //   options: f x
    let sum6 () =
        printfn "test 06: "
        let rec sum6Inner x =
            match x with 
            | 10000000 -> x
            | _ -> 
                let acc = x + 1
                sum6Inner acc
        sum6Inner 0

    // No StackOverflow in Debug
    // No StackOverflow in Release
    //  A test case
    //  options: f x and no |>
    let sum7 l =
        printfn "test 07: "
        let rec sum7Inner x =
            match x with 
            | 10000000 -> x
            | _ -> sum7Inner (x + 1)
        sum7Inner 0

    // No StackOverflow in Debug
    // No StackOverflow in Release
    //   A test case
    //   options: f x and |>
    let sum8 () =
        printfn "test 07: "
        let rec sumInner8 x =
            match x with
            | 10000000 -> x
            | _ -> 
                let acc = x + 1
                acc |> sumInner8 
        sumInner8 0

    // causes StackOverflow in Debug
    // causes StackOverflow in Release
    //   Negative confirmation"
    //   A supposed tail call that DOES cause a stack overflow in both debug and release mode"
    //   options: f x y"
    let sum9 () = 
        printfn "test 09: "
        let rec sum9Inner x y =
            match y with
            | 10000000 -> y
            | _ -> 
                let acc = x + y
                1 + sum9Inner x acc
        sum9Inner 1 0   

    // No StackOverflow in Debug
    // No StackOverflow in Release
    //   Positive confirmation
    //   A tail call that DOES NOT cause a stack overflow in both debug and release mode
    //   options: f x y
    let sum10 () =
        printfn "test 10: "
        let rec sum10Inner x y =
            match y with
            | 10000000 -> y
            | _ -> 
                let acc = x + y
                sum10Inner x acc
        sum10Inner 1 0

    // No StackOverflow in Debug
    // No StackOverflow in Release
    //   A test case
    //   options: f x y and no |>
    let sum11 () =
        printfn "test 11: "
        let rec sum11Inner x y =
            match y with
            | 10000000 -> y
            | _ -> 
                sum11Inner x (x + y) 
        sum11Inner 1 0

    // causes StackOverflow in Debug
    // No StackOverflow in Release
    //   A test case
    //   options: f x y and |>
    let sum12 () =
        printfn "test 12: "
        let rec sum12Inner x y =
            match y with
            | 10000000 -> y
            | _ -> 
                let acc = x + y
                acc |> sum12Inner x
        sum12Inner 1 0

    // causes StackOverflow in Debug
    // No StackOverflow in Release
    //   A test case"
    //   options: f x y and |>"
    let sum12 () =
        printfn "test 12: "
        let rec sum12Inner x y =
            match y with
            | 10000000 -> y
            | _ -> 
                let acc = x + y
                acc |> sum12Inner x
        sum12Inner 1 0

    // causes StackOverflow in Debug
    // causes StackOverflow in Release
    //   Negative confirmation"
    //   A supposed tail call that DOES cause a stack overflow in both debug and release mode"
    //   options: f x y"
    let sum13 () = 
        printfn "test 13: "
        let rec sum13Inner x z y =
            match y with
            | 10000000 -> y
            | _ -> 
                let acc = x + y
                1 + sum13Inner x z acc 
        sum13Inner 1 "z" 0

    // No StackOverflow in Debug
    // No StackOverflow in Release
    //   Positive confirmation"
    //   A tail call that DOES NOT cause a stack overflow in both debug and release mode"
    //   options: f x y"
    let sum14 () =
        printfn "test 14: "
        let rec sum14Inner x z y =
            match y with
            | 10000000 -> y
            | _ -> 
                let acc = x + y
                sum14Inner x z acc
        sum14Inner 1 "z" 0

    // No StackOverflow in Debug
    // No StackOverflow in Release
    //   A test case"
    //   options: f x y and no |>"
    let sum15 () =
        printfn "test 15: "
        let rec sum15Inner x z y =
            match y with
            | 10000000 -> y
            | _ -> 
                sum15Inner x z (x + y) 
        sum15Inner 1 "z" 0

    // causes StackOverflow in Debug
    // No StackOverflow in Release
    //   A test case"
    //   options: f x y and |>"
    let sum16 () =
        printfn "test 16: "
        let rec sum16Inner x z y =
            match y with
            | 10000000 -> y
            | _ -> 
                let acc = x + y
                acc |> sum16Inner x z
        sum16Inner 1 "z" 0

    let result1 = sum1 largeList
    printfn "result1: %A" result1

    let result2 = sum2 largeList
    printfn "result2: %A" result2

    let result3 = sum3 largeList
    printfn "result3: %A" result3

    let result4 = sum4 largeList
    printfn "result4: %A" result4

    let result5 = sum5 ()
    printfn "result5: %A" result5

    let result6 = sum6 ()
    printfn "result6: %A" result6

    let result7 = sum7 ()
    printfn "result7: %A" result7

    let result8 = sum8 ()
    printfn "result8: %A" result8

    let result9 = sum9 ()
    printfn "result9: %A" result9

    let result10 = sum10 ()
    printfn "result10: %A" result10

    let result11 = sum11 ()
    printfn "result11: %A" result11

    let result12 = sum12 ()
    printfn "result12: %A" result12

    let result13 = sum13 ()
    printfn "result13: %A" result13

    let result14 = sum14 ()
    printfn "result14: %A" result14

    let result15 = sum15 ()
    printfn "result15: %A" result15

    let result16 = sum16 ()
    printfn "result16: %A" result16

    printf "Press any key to exit: "
    System.Console.ReadKey() |> ignore
    printfn ""

    0 // return an integer exit code
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)

  • 我认为结果是如果你有`y |> fx`那么在调试模式下编译器可以在两个不连续的步骤中应用函数`f`(首先是`x`然后是`y`),这会阻止编译器将直接递归调用转换为循环.如果你有`fxy`,那么编译器会将直接递归调用编译成循环(在调试或释放模式下). (3认同)