Why is code behavior different in release & debug mode?

C#.Net.Net CoreCoreclr

C# Problem Overview


Consider the following code:

private static void Main(string[] args)
{
    var ar = new double[]
    {
        100
    };

    FillTo(ref ar, 5);
    Console.WriteLine(string.Join(",", ar.Select(a => a.ToString()).ToArray()));
}

public static void FillTo(ref double[] dd, int N)
{
    if (dd.Length >= N)
        return;

    double[] Old = dd;
    double d = double.NaN;
    if (Old.Length > 0)
        d = Old[0];

    dd = new double[N];

    for (int i = 0; i < Old.Length; i++)
    {
        dd[N - Old.Length + i] = Old[i];
    }
    for (int i = 0; i < N - Old.Length; i++)
        dd[i] = d;
}

The result in Debug mode is: 100,100,100,100,100. But in Release mode it is: 100,100,100,100,0.

What is happening?

It was tested using .NET framework 4.7.1 and .NET Core 2.0.0.

C# Solutions


Solution 1 - C#

This appears to be a JIT bug; I've tested with:

// ... existing code unchanged
for (int i = 0; i < N - Old.Length; i++)
{
    // Console.WriteLine(i); // <== comment/uncomment this line
    dd[i] = d;
}

and adding the Console.WriteLine(i) fixes it. The only IL change is:

// ...
L_0040: ldc.i4.0 
L_0041: stloc.3 
L_0042: br.s L_004d
L_0044: ldarg.0 
L_0045: ldind.ref 
L_0046: ldloc.3 
L_0047: ldloc.1 
L_0048: stelem.r8 
L_0049: ldloc.3 
L_004a: ldc.i4.1 
L_004b: add 
L_004c: stloc.3 
L_004d: ldloc.3 
L_004e: ldarg.1 
L_004f: ldloc.0 
L_0050: ldlen 
L_0051: conv.i4 
L_0052: sub 
L_0053: blt.s L_0044
L_0055: ret 

vs

// ...
L_0040: ldc.i4.0 
L_0041: stloc.3 
L_0042: br.s L_0053
L_0044: ldloc.3 
L_0045: call void [System.Console]System.Console::WriteLine(int32)
L_004a: ldarg.0 
L_004b: ldind.ref 
L_004c: ldloc.3 
L_004d: ldloc.1 
L_004e: stelem.r8 
L_004f: ldloc.3 
L_0050: ldc.i4.1 
L_0051: add 
L_0052: stloc.3 
L_0053: ldloc.3 
L_0054: ldarg.1 
L_0055: ldloc.0 
L_0056: ldlen 
L_0057: conv.i4 
L_0058: sub 
L_0059: blt.s L_0044
L_005b: ret 

which looks exactly right (the only difference is the extra ldloc.3 and call void [System.Console]System.Console::WriteLine(int32), and a different but equivalent target for br.s).

It'll need a JIT fix, I suspect.

Environment:

  • Environment.Version: 4.0.30319.42000
  • <TargetFramework>netcoreapp2.0</TargetFramework>
  • VS: 15.5.0 Preview 5.0
  • dotnet --version: 2.1.1

Solution 2 - C#

It's an assembly error indeed. x64, .net 4.7.1, release build.

disassembly:

			for(int i = 0; i < N - Old.Length; i++)
00007FF942690ADD  xor         eax,eax  
			for(int i = 0; i < N - Old.Length; i++)
00007FF942690ADF  mov         ebx,esi  
00007FF942690AE1  sub         ebx,ebp  
00007FF942690AE3  test        ebx,ebx  
00007FF942690AE5  jle         00007FF942690AFF  
				dd[i] = d;
00007FF942690AE7  mov         rdx,qword ptr [rdi]  
00007FF942690AEA  cmp         eax,dword ptr [rdx+8]  
00007FF942690AED  jae         00007FF942690B11  
00007FF942690AEF  movsxd      rcx,eax  
00007FF942690AF2  vmovsd      qword ptr [rdx+rcx*8+10h],xmm6  
			for(int i = 0; i < N - Old.Length; i++)
00007FF942690AF9  inc         eax  
00007FF942690AFB  cmp         ebx,eax  
00007FF942690AFD  jg          00007FF942690AE7  
00007FF942690AFF  vmovaps     xmm6,xmmword ptr [rsp+20h]  
00007FF942690B06  add         rsp,30h  
00007FF942690B0A  pop         rbx  
00007FF942690B0B  pop         rbp  
00007FF942690B0C  pop         rsi  
00007FF942690B0D  pop         rdi  
00007FF942690B0E  pop         r14  
00007FF942690B10  ret  

The issue is at address 00007FF942690AFD, the jg 00007FF942690AE7. It jumps back if ebx (which contains 4, the loop end value) is bigger (jg) than eax, the value i. This fails when it's 4 of course, so it doesn't write the last element in the array.

It fails, because it inc's i's register value (eax, at 0x00007FF942690AF9), and then checks it with 4, but it still has to write that value. It's a bit hard to pinpoint where exactly the issue is located, as it looks like it might be the result of the optimization of (N-Old.Length), as the debug build contains that code, but the release build precalculates that. So that's for the jit people to fix ;)

Attributions

All content for this solution is sourced from the original question on Stackoverflow.

The content on this page is licensed under the Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) license.

Content TypeOriginal AuthorOriginal Content on Stackoverflow
QuestionAshkan NourzadehView Question on Stackoverflow
Solution 1 - C#Marc GravellView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 2 - C#Frans BoumaView Answer on Stackoverflow