Conversation
tlively
approved these changes
Mar 22, 2021
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 join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
I'm not entirely sure how LUB removal made this noticeable, as it seems
to be a pre-existing bug. However, somehow before #3669 it was not
noticable - perhaps the finalize code worked around it.
The bug is that RemoveUnusedBrs was moving code around and
finalizing the parent before the child. The correct pattern is always to
work from the children outwards, as otherwise the parent is trying to
finalize itself based on non-finalized children.
The fix is to just not finalize in the stealSlice method. The caller can
do it after finishing any other work it has. As part of this refactoring,
move stealSlice into the single pass that uses it; aside from that being
more orderly, this method is really not a general-purpose tool, it is
quite specific to what RemoveUnusedBrs does, and it might easily
be used incorrectly elsewhere.