RFR (S): 8024943: ciReplay: fails to dump replay data during safepointing

[Vladimir Ivanov]

Updated webrev:
   http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vlivanov/8024943/webrev.01/

Verified that replay data is dumped correctly in the following combinations:
   - thread_in_native
   - thread_in_vm
   - thread_in_vm + Compile_lock

Regarding ciEnv in invalid state (leaving aside the cases when the 
instance is corrupted), the only case when it is possible is when the VM 
crashed in ~ciEnv(). Don't know whether fixing it is worth the effort - 
in both cases we don't get valid replay data file.

Best regards,
Vladimir Ivanov

On 10/3/13 12:57 AM, John Rose wrote:
> On Oct 2, 2013, at 1:15 PM, Vladimir Ivanov <vladimir.x.ivanov at oracle.com> wrote:
>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vlivanov/8024943/webrev.00/
>> 15 lines changed: 11 ins; 0 del; 4 mod
>>
>> In some situations VM fails to dump compiler replay file (produces empty replay_pid%p.log). The reason is that ciEnv::dump_replay_data tries to do thread state transition to VM unconditionally and acquire Compile_lock. It doesn't always work in context of VM error reporter.
>>
>> The fix is to provide new method specifically for VM error reporter (ciEnv::dump_replay_data_unsafe) which doesn't perform aforementioned actions.
>>
>> Testing: manual (checked that a valid dump is produced for a crash during safepointing).
>
> Is is possible that you've pushed a bug further into the CI code?  I would like you to take a look at this (if you haven't already) and either make code adjustments or describe current assumptions in comments, for the next maintainer.
>
> What I mean about "pushed a bug" is that the CI is (generally speaking) sensitive to the thread state.  (Note the GUARDED_VM_ENTRY macros everywhere.)  The dump_replay_data function calls a bunch of dump_replay_data subroutines on lots of little data structures in the CI.  Are any of them also sensitive to thread state?  If so, perhaps you want to have your
>
> Also, the ciEnv::current() call returns something to the error reporter, and if that something is non-null, it is assumed to be (up to high probability, of course) a valid ciEnv structure.  Are there any places where the ciEnv guy is in an inconsistent state but still published by ciEnv::current()?  Probably not, but it might be worth a comment noting the appropriate conditions.  My specific worry is that the call to remove_symbols in ~ciEnv might leave a space where the dumper would not see valid state.
>
> This crash dumper stuff cannot be nailed down 100%, of course, but this might be a good moment to make sure we've at least stomped on it a bit.
>
> Reviewed, pending resolution of the above.
>
> Thanks,
> — John
>