RFR: 8346866: [ASAN] memoryReserver.cpp reported applying non-zero offset to non-null pointer produced null pointer [v4]

[Stefan Karlsson]

On Fri, 3 Jan 2025 02:50:13 GMT, SendaoYan <syan at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Hi all,
>> This PR add an extra loop condition check `p2u(attach_point) > stepsize` in function `HeapReserver::Instance::try_reserve_range` to make sure the loop will not wrap around, and make UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer silent. The change do not change the original logic, risk is low.
>> 
>> Additional testing:
>> 
>> - [ ]  jtreg tests(include tier1/2/3 etc., which include tests added by [PR22712](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/22712)) on linux-x64 with release build
>> - [ ]  jtreg tests(include tier1/2/3 etc., which include tests added by [PR22712](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/22712)) on linux-x64 with fastdebug build
>> - [ ]  jtreg tests(include tier1/2/3 etc., which include tests added by [PR22712](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/22712)) on linux-aarch64 with release build
>> - [ ]  jtreg tests(include tier1/2/3 etc., which include tests added by [PR22712](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/22712)) on linux-aarch64 with fastdebug build
>
> SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with three additional commits since the last revision:
> 
>  - remove ultra empty line
>  - Use offsets in the loop logic instead
>  - Use offsets in the loop logic instead

> > Maybe simply 1 if we now change this to calculate using offsets.
> 
> Do you mean change like this:
> 
> ```diff
> -    (size_t) highest_start : align_up(attach_range / num_attempts_to_try, attach_point_alignment);
> +    1 : align_up(attach_range / num_attempts_to_try, attach_point_alignment);
> ```
> 
> I can merge this change if it's necessary.

Yes, exactly. I think it makes sense to fix that in your patch if we are changing to offsets for the loop.

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22897#issuecomment-2569081391