Re: Operand restriction not satisfied with *check-consistency* (Aarch64)

I don't really care about errors produced with *check-consistency*.

On Mon, Dec 8, 2025 at 6:03 PM Eric Marsden via Sbcl-devel
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>  From random-integer testing on Aarch64 (FWIW, the same setting for
> *check-consistency* doesn't trigger errors on AMD64).
>
> * (lisp-implementation-version)
> "2.5.11.55-018143647"
> * (setq sb-c::*check-consistency* t)
> T
> * (defun foo (a)
>      (declare (type (integer -85113 750105) a))
>      (sbit #*0111110010 (min 9 (max 0 a))))
>
> debugger invoked on a SB-INT:BUG in thread
> #<THREAD tid=537180 "main thread" RUNNING {1001990003}>:
>      operand restriction not satisfied: #<SB-C:TN-REF
>                                           :TN #<SB-C:TN t1[ZR] :COMPONENT>
>                                           :WRITE-P NIL
>                                           :VOP SB-VM::MOVE-IF/WORD>
>    This is probably a bug in SBCL itself. (Alternatively, SBCL might
> have been
>    corrupted by bad user code, e.g. by an undefined Lisp operation like
>    (FMAKUNBOUND 'COMPILE), or by stray pointers from alien code or from
> unsafe
>    Lisp code; or there might be a bug in the OS or hardware that SBCL is
> running
>    on.) If it seems to be a bug in SBCL itself, the maintainers would
> like to
>    know about it. Bug reports are welcome on the SBCL mailing lists,
> which you
>    can find at <http://sbcl.sourceforge.net/>.
>
> Type HELP for debugger help, or (SB-EXT:EXIT) to exit from SBCL.
>
> restarts (invokable by number or by possibly-abbreviated name):
>    0: [ABORT] Exit debugger, returning to top level.
>
> (SB-INT:BUG "operand restriction not satisfied: ~S" #<SB-C:TN-REF :TN
> #<SB-C:TN t1[ZR] :COMPONENT> :WRITE-P NIL :VOP SB-VM::MOVE-IF/WORD>)
> 0] backtrace
>
> Backtrace for: #<SB-THREAD:THREAD tid=537180 "main thread" RUNNING
> {1001990003}>
> 0: (SB-INT:BUG "operand restriction not satisfied: ~S" #<SB-C:TN-REF :TN
> #<SB-C:TN t1[ZR] :COMPONENT> :WRITE-P NIL :VOP SB-VM::MOVE-IF/WORD>)
> 1: (SB-C::BARF "operand restriction not satisfied: ~S" #<SB-C:TN-REF :TN
> #<SB-C:TN t1[ZR] :COMPONENT> :WRITE-P NIL :VOP SB-VM::MOVE-IF/WORD>)
> 2: ((FLET SB-C::CHECK :IN SB-C::CHECK-PACK-CONSISTENCY) (#(NIL NIL T NIL
> #1=(17 . #2=(2)) NIL NIL #2# #3=(17) NIL NIL NIL ...) #(NIL NIL T NIL
> #1# NIL NIL #2# #3# NIL NIL NIL ..\
> .)) #<SB-C:TN-REF :TN #<SB-C:TN t2[NL1] :NORMAL> :WRITE-P NIL :VOP
> SB-VM::MOVE-IF/WORD>)
> 3: (SB-C::CHECK-PACK-CONSISTENCY #<SB-C:COMPONENT :NAME "<unknown>"
> {1001938993}>)
> 4: (SB-C::%COMPILE-COMPONENT #<SB-C:COMPONENT :NAME "<unknown>"
> {1001938993}>)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sbcl-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sbcl-devel


_______________________________________________
Sbcl-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sbcl-devel