Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

8186787: clang-4.0 SIGSEGV in Unsafe_PutByte #553

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

zzambers
Copy link
Contributor

@zzambers zzambers commented Jul 25, 2024

This backport fixes failures (segfaults) in following tests which appeared after macos update:

sun/misc/CopyMemory.java 
compiler/unsafe/OpaqueAccesses.java

Backport differs from original changeset, because there were significant changes/refactoring in unsafe.

Notes:

  • original changeset changes pointer returned by addr (MemoryAccess class), to volatile. Otherwise it is basically just refactoring.
  • MemoryAccess is used by Unsafe_{Set,Put}* and Unsafe_{Set,Put}*Volatile functions, defined using DEFINE_GETSETOOP and DEFINE_GETSETOOP_VOLATILE macros
  • jdk8 does not have MemoryAccess class, so equivalent pointers, in functions mentioned higher, are cast to volatile, to achieve same effect

Testing:
Tier1: OK (fixes sun/misc/CopyMemory.java and compiler/unsafe/OpaqueAccesses.java tests on macos, 1 failure on Linux x86 is timeout - seems unrelated, macos failures explained here: #544 (comment))


Progress

  • Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
  • JDK-8186787 needs maintainer approval
  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue

Issue

  • JDK-8186787: clang-4.0 SIGSEGV in Unsafe_PutByte (Bug - P2)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk8u-dev.git pull/553/head:pull/553
$ git checkout pull/553

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/553
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk8u-dev.git pull/553/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 553

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 553

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk8u-dev/pull/553.diff

Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Jul 25, 2024

👋 Welcome back zzambers! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jul 25, 2024

❗ This change is not yet ready to be integrated.
See the Progress checklist in the description for automated requirements.

@openjdk openjdk bot changed the title Backport 6dc1d8c06d98e127b022886172e16b90bf357c97 8186787: clang-4.0 SIGSEGV in Unsafe_PutByte Jul 25, 2024
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jul 25, 2024

This backport pull request has now been updated with issue from the original commit.

@openjdk openjdk bot added backport rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Jul 25, 2024
@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Jul 25, 2024

Webrevs

@zzambers
Copy link
Contributor Author

zzambers commented Jul 29, 2024

Log from failing (segfaulting) tests (without fix, for reference):
CopyMemory-segfault.log
OpaqueAccesses-segfault.log

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Aug 26, 2024

@zzambers This pull request has been inactive for more than 4 weeks and will be automatically closed if another 4 weeks passes without any activity. To avoid this, simply add a new comment to the pull request. Feel free to ask for assistance if you need help with progressing this pull request towards integration!

@zzambers
Copy link
Contributor Author

keep open

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Oct 21, 2024

@zzambers This pull request has been inactive for more than 4 weeks and will be automatically closed if another 4 weeks passes without any activity. To avoid this, simply add a new comment to the pull request. Feel free to ask for assistance if you need help with progressing this pull request towards integration!

3 similar comments
@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Oct 31, 2024

@zzambers This pull request has been inactive for more than 4 weeks and will be automatically closed if another 4 weeks passes without any activity. To avoid this, simply add a new comment to the pull request. Feel free to ask for assistance if you need help with progressing this pull request towards integration!

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Oct 31, 2024

@zzambers This pull request has been inactive for more than 4 weeks and will be automatically closed if another 4 weeks passes without any activity. To avoid this, simply add a new comment to the pull request. Feel free to ask for assistance if you need help with progressing this pull request towards integration!

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Oct 31, 2024

@zzambers This pull request has been inactive for more than 4 weeks and will be automatically closed if another 4 weeks passes without any activity. To avoid this, simply add a new comment to the pull request. Feel free to ask for assistance if you need help with progressing this pull request towards integration!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backport rfr Pull request is ready for review
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant