12 RFR(M) 8214583: AccessController.getContext may return wrong value after JDK-8212605
dean.long at oracle.com
dean.long at oracle.com
Mon Dec 17 05:54:57 UTC 2018
On 12/16/18 9:52 PM, Claes Redestad wrote:
>
> Either way, it might be nice to have a more explicit facility for this
> in a future release, as David suggested. Say an @Escaping local
> variable/parameter annotation.
>
I agree. I suggested @Escapes or @StackWalkable in JDK-8214585.
@Escaping or
@StackVisible sound just as reasonable.
dl
> /Claes
>
> On 2018-12-17 05:45, dean.long at oracle.com wrote:
>> Unfortunately, I don't think @DontInline on an empty method is
>> sufficient
>> here. If other code is relying on @DontInline for the same purpose then
>> we might need to reexamine that code. My understanding from discussing
>> with other compiler engineers is that using a native method is the
>> safest
>> technique that the compilers can't see through. The problem with
>> @DontInline is that C2 looks at the bytecodes of the target method, even
>> if it isn't inlined (see BCEscapeAnalyzer and the EstimateArgEscape
>> flag).
>> There may be a way to make it work, but that would require more
>> investigation, and I'm not sure the benefit outweighs the risk.
>>
>> dl
>>
>> On 12/15/18 6:48 AM, Claes Redestad wrote:
>>> Hi Dean,
>>>
>>> to avoid escape analysis-eliminated allocations in the past @DontInline
>>> has been sufficient. This means a simpler patch (no changes to native
>>> code needed - added assertions notwithstanding) and passes your tests
>>> with C2 (it'd concern me if Graal's EA sees through this trick, as it
>>> might break some existing places where DontInline is used to this
>>> effect):
>>>
>>> /**
>>> * The value needs to be physically located in the frame, so
>>> that it
>>> * can be found by a stack walk.
>>> */
>>> @Hidden
>>> @DontInline
>>> private static void ensureMaterializedForStackWalk(Object o) {}
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> /Claes
>>>
>>> On 2018-12-15 01:59, dean.long at oracle.com wrote:
>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8214583
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dlong/8214583/webrev
>>>>
>>>> This change includes two new regression test that demonstrate the
>>>> problem, and a fix that allows the tests
>>>> to pass.
>>>>
>>>> The problem happens when the JIT compiler's escape analysis
>>>> eliminates the allocation of the AccessControlContext object passed
>>>> to doPrivileged. The compiler thinks this is safe because it does
>>>> not see that the object "escapes". However, getContext needs to be
>>>> able to find the object using a stack walk, so we need a way to
>>>> tell the compiler that it does indeed escape. To do this we pass
>>>> the value to a native method that does nothing.
>>>>
>>>> Microbenchmark results:
>>>>
>>>> jdk12-b18:
>>>>
>>>> Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units
>>>> DoPrivileged.test avgt 25 255.626 ± 6.446 ns/op
>>>> DoPrivileged.testInline avgt 25 250.968 ± 4.975 ns/op
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> jdk12-b19:
>>>>
>>>> Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units
>>>> DoPrivileged.test avgt 25 5.689 ± 0.001 ns/op
>>>> DoPrivileged.testInline avgt 25 2.765 ± 0.001 ns/op
>>>>
>>>> this fix:
>>>>
>>>> Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units
>>>> DoPrivileged.test avgt 25 5.020 ± 0.001 ns/op
>>>> DoPrivileged.testInline avgt 25 2.774 ± 0.025 ns/op
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> dl
>>
More information about the security-dev
mailing list