Invalid JCK test case gcpl00104.c
Alan Bateman
Alan.Bateman at Sun.COM
Tue Nov 11 12:00:58 PST 2008
Martin,
Yuri can confirm but I suspect this one has already been fixed as:
6710561: JCK6b:
vm/jvmti/GetConstantPool/gcpl001/gcpl00104/gcpl00104.html can fail under
JDK 6.0 on Linux
but not sure why it is not on the exclude list.
-Alan.
Martin Buchholz wrote:
> Executive summary: Invalid test case; please file a JCK bug and add to
> the JCK exclude list.
>
> Whiile running the JCK,
> we had random crashes due to memory corruption in the JCK test
> JCK-runtime-6b/tests/vm/jvmti/GetConstantPool/gcpl001/gcpl00104/gcpl00104.c
>
> The test suffers from multiple memory corruption bugs.
>
> E.g. in this piece of code
>
> size = 5;
> .....
> cp_info = (gcpl00104_Integer_info*) malloc(sizeof(gcpl00104_Integer_info));
> if (cp_info != NULL) {
> cp_info->tag = cp_bytes[*offset];
> lprintf(env, "0x");
> for (i = 1; i < size; i++) {
> cp_info->bytes[i] = cp_bytes[*offset + i];
> lprintf(env, "%0*X", 2, (int) cp_info->bytes[i]);
> }
>
> the test case is writing to cp_info->bytes[4],
> but bytes is of type char[4], so that's (possibly)
> one past the end of the malloc'ed region.
>
> Other functions in this test have similar bugs.
>
> Whether you actually see a crash is strongly dependent on your malloc
> implementation.
> valgrind was able to pinpoint the cause; to valgrindise the JDK, you
> need the flag
> --trace-children
>
> Thanks,
>
> Martin
>
More information about the conformance-discuss
mailing list