Skip to content

Adding some options in support of F*#6774

Merged
NikolajBjorner merged 2 commits intoZ3Prover:masterfrom
mtzguido:master
Jun 20, 2023
Merged

Adding some options in support of F*#6774
NikolajBjorner merged 2 commits intoZ3Prover:masterfrom
mtzguido:master

Conversation

@mtzguido
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

In upgrading F* to use the latest Z3, these two features prove to be quite disruptive, so add options to disable them.

Not sure if the naming is adequate, any thoughts?

Comment thread src/ast/rewriter/bool_rewriter.cpp Outdated
@@ -293,7 +294,8 @@ br_status bool_rewriter::mk_nflat_or_core(unsigned num_args, expr * const * args
#endif
if (s) {
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think the code should be

        if (m_sort_disjunctions && s) {
            ast_lt lt;
            std::sort(buffer.begin(), buffer.end(), lt);       
            result = m().mk_or(sz, buffer.data());
            return BR_DONE;
        }

If nothing is sorted, then the rewrite has no effect. The rewrite engine is saved from rebuilding expressions.

Comment thread src/ast/rewriter/bool_rewriter.cpp Outdated
@@ -331,7 +333,8 @@ br_status bool_rewriter::mk_flat_or_core(unsigned num_args, expr * const * args,
if (mk_nflat_or_core(flat_args.size(), flat_args.data(), result) == BR_FAILED) {
if (!ordered) {
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

if (!ordered && m_sort_disjunctions)

…nctions)

True by default, retaining current behavior.
@mtzguido
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Thanks for reviewing, good points! Just updated the PR.

@NikolajBjorner NikolajBjorner merged commit 3517361 into Z3Prover:master Jun 20, 2023
mtzguido added a commit to mtzguido/z3 that referenced this pull request Jun 23, 2023
…junctions

After introducing the rewriter.sort_disjunctions option (Z3Prover#6774), I
noticed a segfault in a Z3 run that was working fine for me before the
PR.

I traced the difference to a slight discrepancy between the first patch
I submitted and the one we ended up merging: my first version would skip
sorting the disjuncts in mk_nflat_core, but still return BR_DONE, while
the patch in master returns BR_FAILED instead.

This patch fixes that problem, and it makes slightly more sense to me to
return a BR_DONE since, if `s` is true, some disjunct (e.g. a `false`
or a repeat) might have been simplified away. However I don't fully
understand this code.

... and I can't say I understand why the segfault happens. Perhaps that
is a separate issue?

This is the file to reproduce:
 https://gist.github.com/mtzguido/b7360c74d3d2e42d89f1bd9149ad26f6

Here's a stack trace of the failure, mk_nflat_or_core is not involved.
```
 (gdb) where
 #0  0x0000555555b98497 in smt::context::get_lit_assignment(unsigned int) const ()
 Z3Prover#1  0x0000555555b984cb in smt::context::get_assignment(sat::literal) const ()
 Z3Prover#2  0x0000555555b98504 in smt::context::get_assignment(unsigned int) const ()
 Z3Prover#3  0x0000555555ca83b8 in smt::context::get_assignment_core(expr*) const ()
 Z3Prover#4  0x0000555555c9af5a in smt::context::get_assignment(expr*) const ()
 Z3Prover#5  0x0000555555d7bd1d in (anonymous namespace)::has_child_assigned_to(smt::context&, app*, lbool, expr*&, unsigned int) ()
 Z3Prover#6  0x0000555555d7c413 in (anonymous namespace)::rel_case_split_queue::next_case_split_core(ptr_vector<expr>&, unsigned int&, unsigned int&, lbool&) ()
 Z3Prover#7  0x0000555555d7c589 in (anonymous namespace)::rel_case_split_queue::next_case_split(unsigned int&, lbool&) ()
 Z3Prover#8  0x0000555555c9c1b7 in smt::context::decide() ()
 Z3Prover#9  0x0000555555ca39fd in smt::context::bounded_search() ()
 Z3Prover#10 0x0000555555ca30c2 in smt::context::search() ()
 Z3Prover#11 0x0000555555ca273d in smt::context::check(unsigned int, expr* const*, bool) ()
 Z3Prover#12 0x0000555555cb166a in smt::kernel::check(unsigned int, expr* const*) ()
 Z3Prover#13 0x0000555555cb9695 in (anonymous namespace)::smt_solver::check_sat_core2(unsigned int, expr* const*) ()
 Z3Prover#14 0x00005555560dc0c6 in solver_na2as::check_sat_core(unsigned int, expr* const*) ()
 Z3Prover#15 0x00005555560d73f3 in combined_solver::check_sat_core(unsigned int, expr* const*) ()
 Z3Prover#16 0x00005555560d34e3 in solver::check_sat(unsigned int, expr* const*) ()
 Z3Prover#17 0x0000555556097b26 in cmd_context::check_sat(unsigned int, expr* const*) ()
 Z3Prover#18 0x0000555556082ff0 in smt2::parser::parse_check_sat() ()
 Z3Prover#19 0x0000555556084dc0 in smt2::parser::parse_cmd() ()
 Z3Prover#20 0x00005555560861b6 in smt2::parser::operator()() ()
 Z3Prover#21 0x00005555560757e6 in parse_smt2_commands(cmd_context&, std::basic_istream<char, std::char_traits<char> >&, bool, params_ref const&, char const*) ()
 Z3Prover#22 0x00005555555e8f68 in read_smtlib2_commands(char const*) ()
 Z3Prover#23 0x00005555555ee6f6 in main ()
 (gdb)
```
NikolajBjorner pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 23, 2023
…junctions (#6779)

After introducing the rewriter.sort_disjunctions option (#6774), I
noticed a segfault in a Z3 run that was working fine for me before the
PR.

I traced the difference to a slight discrepancy between the first patch
I submitted and the one we ended up merging: my first version would skip
sorting the disjuncts in mk_nflat_core, but still return BR_DONE, while
the patch in master returns BR_FAILED instead.

This patch fixes that problem, and it makes slightly more sense to me to
return a BR_DONE since, if `s` is true, some disjunct (e.g. a `false`
or a repeat) might have been simplified away. However I don't fully
understand this code.

... and I can't say I understand why the segfault happens. Perhaps that
is a separate issue?

This is the file to reproduce:
 https://gist.github.com/mtzguido/b7360c74d3d2e42d89f1bd9149ad26f6

Here's a stack trace of the failure, mk_nflat_or_core is not involved.
```
 (gdb) where
 #0  0x0000555555b98497 in smt::context::get_lit_assignment(unsigned int) const ()
 #1  0x0000555555b984cb in smt::context::get_assignment(sat::literal) const ()
 #2  0x0000555555b98504 in smt::context::get_assignment(unsigned int) const ()
 #3  0x0000555555ca83b8 in smt::context::get_assignment_core(expr*) const ()
 #4  0x0000555555c9af5a in smt::context::get_assignment(expr*) const ()
 #5  0x0000555555d7bd1d in (anonymous namespace)::has_child_assigned_to(smt::context&, app*, lbool, expr*&, unsigned int) ()
 #6  0x0000555555d7c413 in (anonymous namespace)::rel_case_split_queue::next_case_split_core(ptr_vector<expr>&, unsigned int&, unsigned int&, lbool&) ()
 #7  0x0000555555d7c589 in (anonymous namespace)::rel_case_split_queue::next_case_split(unsigned int&, lbool&) ()
 #8  0x0000555555c9c1b7 in smt::context::decide() ()
 #9  0x0000555555ca39fd in smt::context::bounded_search() ()
 #10 0x0000555555ca30c2 in smt::context::search() ()
 #11 0x0000555555ca273d in smt::context::check(unsigned int, expr* const*, bool) ()
 #12 0x0000555555cb166a in smt::kernel::check(unsigned int, expr* const*) ()
 #13 0x0000555555cb9695 in (anonymous namespace)::smt_solver::check_sat_core2(unsigned int, expr* const*) ()
 #14 0x00005555560dc0c6 in solver_na2as::check_sat_core(unsigned int, expr* const*) ()
 #15 0x00005555560d73f3 in combined_solver::check_sat_core(unsigned int, expr* const*) ()
 #16 0x00005555560d34e3 in solver::check_sat(unsigned int, expr* const*) ()
 #17 0x0000555556097b26 in cmd_context::check_sat(unsigned int, expr* const*) ()
 #18 0x0000555556082ff0 in smt2::parser::parse_check_sat() ()
 #19 0x0000555556084dc0 in smt2::parser::parse_cmd() ()
 #20 0x00005555560861b6 in smt2::parser::operator()() ()
 #21 0x00005555560757e6 in parse_smt2_commands(cmd_context&, std::basic_istream<char, std::char_traits<char> >&, bool, params_ref const&, char const*) ()
 #22 0x00005555555e8f68 in read_smtlib2_commands(char const*) ()
 #23 0x00005555555ee6f6 in main ()
 (gdb)
```
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants