RFR(T) 8218566: NMT: missing memory tag for assert poison page

[Thomas Stüfe]

On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 5:46 PM <zgu at redhat.com> wrote:

> Hi Thomas,
>
> On Wed, 2019-02-06 at 17:29 +0100, Thomas Stüfe wrote:
> > Hmm...
> >
> > the patch is fine, but we should fix os::reserve_memory:
> >
> Thanks for reviewing.
>
> > we have
> >
> >   static char*  reserve_memory(size_t bytes, char* addr = 0,
> >                                size_t alignment_hint = 0, int
> > file_desc = -1);
> >   static char*  reserve_memory(size_t bytes, char* addr,
> >                                size_t alignment_hint, MEMFLAGS
> > flags);
> >
> > one version registers the memory with NMT, one does not. It would be
> > better if both did, like os::malloc does in all its variants, instead
> > of having to fix up the callsites...
> Yes, they are inconsistent. IIRC, that was due to up/down calls between
> os and pd methods. There is also related RFE (JDK-8198226) in this
> area.
>

Ah, thanks for the info. Makes sense to clean that up.

..Thomas


>
> Thanks,
>
> -Zhengyu
>
>
> >
> > Cheers, Thomas
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 5:15 PM <zgu at redhat.com> wrote:
> > > Please review the trivial change to tag assert poison page.
> > >
> > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8218566
> > > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~zgu/JDK-8218566/webrev.00/
> > >
> > > Test:
> > >   hotspot_nmt on Linux x64 (fastdebug and release),
> > >   passed all except
> > > runtime/NMT/CheckForProperDetailStackTrace.java
> > >   (JDK-8218458) with release build.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > -Zhengyu
>