CW-GSTACK

debug a rewriting loop or stack overflow
Major Section:  OTHER

General Forms:
(cw-gstack)
(cw-gstack :frames 10)       ; show only the top 10 frames
(cw-gstack :frames (1 10))   ; same as above:  show only frames 1 through 10
(cw-gstack :frames (10 20))  ; show only frames 10 through 20
(cw-gstack :evisc-tuple nil) ; print using default ``evisceration''
(cw-gstack :evisc-tuple x)   ; print with evisceration tuple x
For the last case above, see ld-evisc-tuple.

Stack overflows may occur, perhaps caused by looping rewrite rules. In some Lisps, especially GCL, stack overflows often manifest themselves as segmentation faults, causing the entire ACL2 image to crash. Finding looping rewrite rules can be tricky, especially if you are using books supplied by other people. (However, see set-rewrite-stack-limit for a way to avoid stack overflows caused by rewriter loops.)

A wonderful trick is the following. When there is a stack overflow during a proof, abort and then try it again after turning on rewrite stack monitoring with :brr t. When the stack overflows again, exit to raw Lisp. How you exit to raw Lisp depends on which Lisp you are using. In Allegro Common Lisp, for example, the stack overflow will leave you in an interactive break. It is often a good idea to exit the break immediately (e.g., using :pop if you use Allegro Common Lisp, or :q using GCL), which will leave you in the top-level ACL2 command loop, after which it is recommended to leave that loop using :q. That will leave you in raw Lisp. Then, execute

(cw-gstack)
If the loop is in the rewriter, it will probably be evident! You can re-enter the ACL2 loop now with (lp).

Note: By default, cw-gstack ``eviscerates'' terms, printing abbreviated representations of large terms using print-level 3 and print-length 4; see evisc-tuple. The user can control this behavior by using (cw-gstack :evisc-tuple x), where x is nil or an evisceration tuple; see ld-evisc-tuple. For example, (cw-gstack :evisc-tuple nil) will avoid all evisceration, while the default behavior can be obtained by using (cw-gstack :evisc-tuple '(nil 3 4 (hide))), meaning that substructures deeper than 3 are replaced by ``#'' and those longer than 4 are replaced by ``...'', and terms of the form (hide ...) are printed as <hidden>. Also see set-iprint for an alternative to printing ``#'' and ``...''.

If you are in GCL the stack overflow may cause a segmentation fault and abort the Lisp job. This makes it harder to debug but here is what you do. First, re-create the situation just prior to submitting the form that will cause the stack overflow. You can do this without suffering through all the proofs by using the :ld-skip-proofsp option of ld to reload your scripts. Before you submit the form that causes the stack overflow, exit the ACL2 command loop with :q. In raw GCL type:

(si::use-fast-links nil)
This will slow GCL down but make it detect and signal stack overflows rather than overwrite the system memory. Now reenter the ACL2 command loop with (lp).

Now carry on as described above, turning on rewrite stack monitoring with :brr t and provoking the stack overflow. When it occurs, you will be in an interactive break. Exit to raw Lisp with two successive :q's, one to get out of the error break and the next to get out of the top-level ACL2 command loop. Then in raw GCL execute (cw-gstack).

Suggestion: Once you have found the loop and fixed it, you should execute the ACL2 command :brr nil, so that you don't slow down subsequent proof attempts. If you are in GCL, you should also get into raw Lisp and execute (si::use-fast-links t).