Parallel GC Thread crash
Stefan Karlsson
stefan.karlsson at oracle.com
Mon Feb 10 19:42:49 UTC 2020
Hi Sundar,
On 2020-02-10 19:32, Sundara Mohan M wrote:
> Hi Stefan,
> We started seeing more crashes on JDK13.0.1+9
>
> Since seeing it on GC Task Thread assumed it is related to GC.
As I said in my previous mail, I don't think this is caused by GC code.
More below.
>
> # Problematic frame:
> # V [libjvm.so+0xd183c0] PSRootsClosure<false>::do_oop(oopDesc**)+0x30
>
> Command Line: -XX:+AlwaysPreTouch -Xms64000m -Xmx64000m
> -XX:NewSize=40000m -XX:+DisableExplicitGC -Xnoclassgc
> -XX:+UseParallelGC -XX:ParallelGCThreads=40 -XX:ConcGCTh
> reads=5 ...
>
> Host: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2680 v3 @ 2.50GHz, 48 cores, 125G, Red
> Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 6.10 (Santiago)
> Time: Fri Feb 7 11:15:04 2020 UTC elapsed time: 286290 seconds (3d 7h
> 31m 30s)
>
> --------------- T H R E A D ---------------
>
> Current thread (0x00007fca6c074000): GCTaskThread "ParGC Thread#28"
> [stack: 0x00007fba72ff1000,0x00007fba730f1000] [id=56530]
>
> Stack: [0x00007fba72ff1000,0x00007fba730f1000],
> sp=0x00007fba730ee850, free space=1014k
> Native frames: (J=compiled Java code, A=aot compiled Java code,
> j=interpreted, Vv=VM code, C=native code)
> V [libjvm.so+0xd183c0] PSRootsClosure<false>::do_oop(oopDesc**)+0x30
> V [libjvm.so+0xc6bf0b] OopMapSet::oops_do(frame const*, RegisterMap
> const*, OopClosure*)+0x2eb
> V [libjvm.so+0x765489] frame::oops_do_internal(OopClosure*,
> CodeBlobClosure*, RegisterMap*, bool)+0x99
> V [libjvm.so+0xf68b17] JavaThread::oops_do(OopClosure*,
> CodeBlobClosure*)+0x187
> V [libjvm.so+0xd190be] ThreadRootsTask::do_it(GCTaskManager*,
> unsigned int)+0x6e
> V [libjvm.so+0x7f422b] GCTaskThread::run()+0x1eb
> V [libjvm.so+0xf707fd] Thread::call_run()+0x10d
> V [libjvm.so+0xc875b7] thread_native_entry(Thread*)+0xe7
>
> JavaThread 0x00007fb8f4036800 (nid = 60927) was being processed
> Java frames: (J=compiled Java code, j=interpreted, Vv=VM code)
> v ~RuntimeStub::_new_array_Java
> J 58520 c2
> ch.qos.logback.classic.spi.ThrowableProxy.<init>(Ljava/lang/Throwable;)V
> (207 bytes) @ 0x00007fca5fd23dec [0x00007fca5fd1dbc0+0x000000000000622c]
> J 66864 c2 webservice.exception.ExceptionLoggingWrapper.execute()V
> (1004 bytes) @ 0x00007fca60c02588 [0x00007fca60bffce0+0x00000000000028a8]
> J 58224 c2
> webservice.exception.mapper.AbstractExceptionMapper.toResponse(Lbeans/exceptions/mapper/V3ErrorCode;Ljava/lang/Exception;)Ljavax/ws/rs/core/Response;
> (105 bytes) @ 0x00007fca5f59bad8 [0x00007fca5f59b880+0x0000000000000258]
> J 69992 c2
> webservice.exception.mapper.JediRequestBlockedExceptionMapper.toResponse(Ljava/lang/Exception;)Ljavax/ws/rs/core/Response;
> (9 bytes) @ 0x00007fca5e1019f4 [0x00007fca5e101940+0x00000000000000b4]
> J 55265 c2
> webservice.filters.ResponseSerializationWorker.processException()Ljava/io/InputStream;
> (332 bytes) @ 0x00007fca5f6f58e0 [0x00007fca5f6f5700+0x00000000000001e0]
> J 483122 c2 webservice.filters.ResponseSerializationWorker.execute()Z
> (272 bytes) @ 0x00007fca622fc2b4 [0x00007fca622fbc80+0x0000000000000634]
> J 15811% c2
> com.lafaspot.common.concurrent.internal.WorkerManagerOneThread.call()Lcom/lafaspot/common/concurrent/internal/WorkerManagerState;
> (486 bytes) @ 0x00007fca5c108794 [0x00007fca5c1082a0+0x00000000000004f4]
> j
> com.lafaspot.common.concurrent.internal.WorkerManagerOneThread.call()Ljava/lang/Object;+1
> J 4586 c1 java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run()V java.base at 13.0.1 (123
> bytes) @ 0x00007fca54d27184 [0x00007fca54d26b00+0x0000000000000684]
> J 7550 c1
> java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(Ljava/util/concurrent/ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker;)V
> java.base at 13.0.1 (187 bytes) @ 0x00007fca54fbb6d4
> [0x00007fca54fba8e0+0x0000000000000df4]
> J 7549 c1 java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run()V
> java.base at 13.0.1 (9 bytes) @ 0x00007fca5454b93c
> [0x00007fca5454b8c0+0x000000000000007c]
> J 4585 c1 java.lang.Thread.run()V java.base at 13.0.1 (17 bytes) @
> 0x00007fca54d250f4 [0x00007fca54d24fc0+0x0000000000000134]
> v ~StubRoutines::call_stub
>
> siginfo: si_signo: 11 (SIGSEGV), si_code: 128 (SI_KERNEL), si_addr:
> 0x0000000000000000
>
> Does JDK11 and 13 have different code for GC. Do you think
> downgrading(JDK11 stable)/upgrading(JDK-13.0.2) might help here?
You should at least move to 13.0.2, to get the latest bug fixes/patches.
There has been a lot of changes in all areas of the JVM between 11 and
13. We don't yet know the root cause of this crash, and I can't say if
this is caused by new changes or not. Have you or anyone filed a bug
report for this?
> Any insight to debug this will be helpful.
Did you try my previous suggestion to run with -XX:+VerifyBeforeGC and
-XX:+VerifyAfterGC? If you can tolerate the longer GC times it
introduces, then you could try to run with
-XX:+UnlockDiagnosticVMOptions -XX:+VerifyBeforeGC -XX:+VerifyAfterGC .
Cheers,
StefanK
>
> TIA
> Sundar
>
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 5:47 AM Stefan Karlsson
> <stefan.karlsson at oracle.com <mailto:stefan.karlsson at oracle.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi Sundar,
>
> The GC crashes when it encounters something bad on the stack:
> > V [libjvm.so+0xc6bf0b] OopMapSet::oops_do(frame const*,
> RegisterMap
> > const*, OopClosure*)+0x2eb
> > V [libjvm.so+0x765489] frame::oops_do_internal(OopClosure*,
>
> This is probably not a GC bug. It's more likely that this is
> caused by
> the JIT compiler. I see in your hotspot-runtime-dev thread, that you
> also get crashes in other compiler related areas.
>
> If you want to rule out the GC, you can run with
> -XX:+VerifyBeforeGC and
> -XX:+VerifyAfterGC, and see if this asserts before the GC has started
> running.
>
> StefanK
>
> On 2020-02-04 04:38, Sundara Mohan M wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I am seeing following crashes frequently on our servers
> > #
> > # A fatal error has been detected by the Java Runtime Environment:
> > #
> > # SIGSEGV (0xb) at pc=0x00007fca3281d311, pid=103575, tid=108299
> > #
> > # JRE version: OpenJDK Runtime Environment (13.0.1+9) (build
> 13.0.1+9)
> > # Java VM: OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (13.0.1+9, mixed mode,
> tiered, parallel
> > gc, linux-amd64)
> > # Problematic frame:
> > # V [libjvm.so+0xcd3311]
> PCMarkAndPushClosure::do_oop(oopDesc**)+0x51
> > #
> > # No core dump will be written. Core dumps have been disabled.
> To enable
> > core dumping, try "ulimit -c unlimited" before starting Java again
> > #
> > # If you would like to submit a bug report, please visit:
> > # https://github.com/AdoptOpenJDK/openjdk-build/issues
> > #
> >
> >
> > --------------- T H R E A D ---------------
> >
> > Current thread (0x00007fca2c051000): GCTaskThread "ParGC
> Thread#8" [stack:
> > 0x00007fca30277000,0x00007fca30377000] [id=108299]
> >
> > Stack: [0x00007fca30277000,0x00007fca30377000],
> sp=0x00007fca30374890,
> > free space=1014k
> > Native frames: (J=compiled Java code, A=aot compiled Java code,
> > j=interpreted, Vv=VM code, C=native code)
> > V [libjvm.so+0xcd3311] PCMarkAndPushClosure::do_oop(oopDesc**)+0x51
> > V [libjvm.so+0xc6bf0b] OopMapSet::oops_do(frame const*,
> RegisterMap
> > const*, OopClosure*)+0x2eb
> > V [libjvm.so+0x765489] frame::oops_do_internal(OopClosure*,
> > CodeBlobClosure*, RegisterMap*, bool)+0x99
> > V [libjvm.so+0xf68b17] JavaThread::oops_do(OopClosure*,
> > CodeBlobClosure*)+0x187
> > V [libjvm.so+0xcce2f0]
> ThreadRootsMarkingTask::do_it(GCTaskManager*,
> > unsigned int)+0xb0
> > V [libjvm.so+0x7f422b] GCTaskThread::run()+0x1eb
> > V [libjvm.so+0xf707fd] Thread::call_run()+0x10d
> > V [libjvm.so+0xc875b7] thread_native_entry(Thread*)+0xe7
> >
> > JavaThread 0x00007fb85c004800 (nid = 111387) was being processed
> > Java frames: (J=compiled Java code, j=interpreted, Vv=VM code)
> > v ~RuntimeStub::_new_array_Java
> > J 225122 c2
> >
> ch.qos.logback.classic.spi.ThrowableProxy.<init>(Ljava/lang/Throwable;)V
> > (207 bytes) @ 0x00007fca21f1a5d8
> [0x00007fca21f17f20+0x00000000000026b8]
> > J 62342 c2
> webservice.exception.ExceptionLoggingWrapper.execute()V (1004
> > bytes) @ 0x00007fca20f0aec8 [0x00007fca20f07f40+0x0000000000002f88]
> > J 225129 c2
> >
> webservice.exception.mapper.AbstractExceptionMapper.toResponse(Lbeans/exceptions/mapper/V3ErrorCode;Ljava/lang/Exception;)Ljavax/ws/rs/core/Response;
> > (105 bytes) @ 0x00007fca1da512ac
> [0x00007fca1da51100+0x00000000000001ac]
> > J 131643 c2
> >
> webservice.exception.mapper.RequestBlockedExceptionMapper.toResponse(Ljava/lang/Exception;)Ljavax/ws/rs/core/Response;
> > (9 bytes) @ 0x00007fca20ce6190
> [0x00007fca20ce60c0+0x00000000000000d0]
> > J 55114 c2
> >
> webservice.filters.ResponseSerializationWorker.processException()Ljava/io/InputStream;
> > (332 bytes) @ 0x00007fca2051fe64
> [0x00007fca2051f820+0x0000000000000644]
> > J 57859 c2
> webservice.filters.ResponseSerializationWorker.execute()Z (272
> > bytes) @ 0x00007fca1ef2ed18 [0x00007fca1ef2e140+0x0000000000000bd8]
> > J 16114% c2
> >
> com.lafaspot.common.concurrent.internal.WorkerManagerOneThread.call()Lcom/lafaspot/common/concurrent/internal/WorkerManagerState;
> > (486 bytes) @ 0x00007fca1ced465c
> [0x00007fca1ced4200+0x000000000000045c]
> > j
> >
> com.lafaspot.common.concurrent.internal.WorkerManagerOneThread.call()Ljava/lang/Object;+1
> > J 11639 c2 java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run()V
> java.base at 13.0.1 (123
> > bytes) @ 0x00007fca1cd00858 [0x00007fca1cd007c0+0x0000000000000098]
> > J 7560 c1
> >
> java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(Ljava/util/concurrent/ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker;)V
> > java.base at 13.0.1 (187 bytes) @ 0x00007fca15b23f54
> > [0x00007fca15b23160+0x0000000000000df4]
> > J 5143 c1 java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run()V
> > java.base at 13.0.1 (9 bytes) @ 0x00007fca15b39abc
> > [0x00007fca15b39a40+0x000000000000007c]
> > J 4488 c1 java.lang.Thread.run()V java.base at 13.0.1 (17 bytes) @
> > 0x00007fca159fc174 [0x00007fca159fc040+0x0000000000000134]
> > v ~StubRoutines::call_stub
> >
> > siginfo: si_signo: 11 (SIGSEGV), si_code: 128 (SI_KERNEL), si_addr:
> > 0x0000000000000000
> >
> > Register to memory mapping:
> > ...
> >
> > Can someone shed more info on when this can happen? I am seeing
> this on
> > multiple servers with Java 13.0.1+9 on RHEL6 servers.
> >
> > There was another thread in hotspot runtime where David Holmes
> pointed this
> >> siginfo: si_signo: 11 (SIGSEGV), si_code: 128 (SI_KERNEL), si_addr:
> > 0x0000000000000000
> >
> >> This seems it may be related to:
> >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8004124
> >
> > Just wondering if this is same or something to do with GC specific.
> >
> >
> >
> > TIA
> > Sundar
> >
>
More information about the hotspot-gc-dev
mailing list