RFR (XS): 8208480: Fix for test failure: assert(is_bound() || is_unused()) after JDK-8206075 in C1

Vladimir Kozlov vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com
Wed Aug 22 16:43:07 UTC 2018


No, it is not urgent. I just wondering if someone forgot to push it.
Thank you for letting me know.

Vladimir

On 8/22/18 9:34 AM, Schmidt, Lutz wrote:
> Simple reason: Gunter is not in. Maybe he is back in the office Thursday, Friday for sure.
> If it's urgent, feel free to push.
> 
> Thanks,
> Lutz
> 
> On 22.08.18, 18:30, "Vladimir Kozlov" <vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
>      What is blocking push?
>      
>      Testing passed on our side.
>      
>      Thanks,
>      Vladimir
>      
>      On 8/20/18 3:13 PM, Hohensee, Paul wrote:
>      > LGTM (I'm a reviewer).
>      >
>      > Thanks,
>      >
>      > Paul
>      >
>      > On 8/20/18, 10:27 AM, "hotspot-runtime-dev on behalf of Liu, Xin" <hotspot-runtime-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net on behalf of xxinliu at amazon.com> wrote:
>      >
>      >      Hi, Gunter,
>      >      It looks good to me, but I am not a reviewer.
>      >
>      >      Now I can explain why LIR_Assembler::bailout doesn't work out.
>      >      LinearScan has its own bailout. BAILOUT/BAILOUT_ in c1_LinearScan.cpp will use LinearScan::bailout. It won't reset LIRAssembler:: _unwind_handler_entry.
>      >
>      >      Actually,  not only LinearScan, c1_GraphBulider , FpuStackAllocator all has private bailout methods. I ignored this fact at first place.  Your reset in dtor is correct.
>      >
>      >      Thanks,
>      >      --lx
>      >
>      >      On 8/20/18, 7:23 AM, "Haug, Gunter" <gunter.haug at sap.com> wrote:
>      >
>      >          Hi all,
>      >
>      >          Here is the updated webrev:
>      >
>      >          http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ghaug/webrevs/8208480.v1/
>      >
>      >          I have removed the redundant reset of the label.
>      >
>      >          Best regards,
>      >          Gunter
>      >
>      >          On 20.08.18, 10:00, "Haug, Gunter" <gunter.haug at sap.com> wrote:
>      >
>      >              Hi all,
>      >
>      >              the bail-out path originates from  Compilation::emit_code_epilog not from LIR_Assembler. The design using the CHECK_BAILOUT() macro is a bit unfortunate in this case. I found it the easiest solution to reset the label in the destructor.
>      >
>      >              In fact you're right, my change makes the original bail-out support redundant, I'll prepare an updated webrev.
>      >
>      >              Best regards,
>      >              Gunter
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      >              From: Liu Xin <navy.xliu at gmail.com>
>      >              Date: Friday, 17. August 2018 at 21:03
>      >              To: Lutz Schmidt <lutz.schmidt at sap.com>
>      >              Cc: "Haug, Gunter" <gunter.haug at sap.com>, "hotspot-runtime-dev at openjdk.java.net" <hotspot-runtime-dev at openjdk.java.net>, "Doerr, Martin" <martin.doerr at sap.com>, "xxinliu at amazon.com" <xxinliu at amazon.com>
>      >              Subject: Re: RFR (XS): 8208480: Fix for test failure: assert(is_bound() || is_unused()) after JDK-8206075 in C1
>      >
>      >              hi, Lutz and Gunter,
>      >
>      >              Thank you for providing the information.
>      >              I met the full codecache in C1 in compiler/codegen/TestCharVect2.java
>      >              In my understanding,  Compilation::emit_code_epilog(LIR_Assembler* assembler) checks bailout for every statement.
>      >              Do you meet the problem only on s390?
>      >
>      >              I am not object to your patch. if you need to reset  the label in c1_LIRAssember's dtor, I think bailout  change  is redundant.
>      >              Remove it make code clearer.
>      >
>      >              diff -r fbb62267e5e9 src/hotspot/share/c1/c1_LIRAssembler.cpp
>      >              --- a/src/hotspot/share/c1/c1_LIRAssembler.cpp
>      >              Thu Aug 09 15:52:23 2018 -0700
>      >              +++ b/src/hotspot/share/c1/c1_LIRAssembler.cpp
>      >              Fri Aug 17 11:57:21 2018 -0700
>      >              @@ -112,6 +112,9 @@
>      >
>      >
>      >               LIR_Assembler::~LIR_Assembler() {
>      >              +  // The unwind handler label may be unbound if this destructor is invoked because of a bail-out.
>      >              +  // Reset it here to avoid an assertion.
>      >              +  _unwind_handler_entry.reset();
>      >               }
>      >
>      >
>      >              diff -r fbb62267e5e9 src/hotspot/share/c1/c1_LIRAssembler.hpp
>      >              --- a/src/hotspot/share/c1/c1_LIRAssembler.hpp
>      >              Thu Aug 09 15:52:23 2018 -0700
>      >              +++ b/src/hotspot/share/c1/c1_LIRAssembler.hpp
>      >              Fri Aug 17 11:57:21 2018 -0700
>      >              @@ -71,11 +71,7 @@
>      >                 void record_non_safepoint_debug_info();
>      >
>      >                 // unified bailout support
>      >              -  void bailout(const char* msg) {
>      >              -    // reset the label in case it hits assertion in destructor.
>      >              -    _unwind_handler_entry.reset();
>      >              -    compilation()->bailout(msg);
>      >              -  }
>      >              +  void bailout(const char* msg) const { compilation()->bailout(msg); }
>      >                 bool bailed_out() const                        { return compilation()->bailed_out(); }
>      >
>      >                 // code emission patterns and accessors
>      >
>      >
>      >              On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 8:35 AM Schmidt, Lutz <mailto:lutz.schmidt at sap.com> wrote:
>      >              Hi,
>      >
>      >              I’m responding on Gunter’s behalf. He just left the office a few minutes ago.
>      >
>      >              The bailout case was a “codecache full” condition. For the error to occur, you must run into that condition when a reference to the label is already generated, but the label is not bound yet. This is not JCK test specific. We just happened to hit “codecache full” there.
>      >
>      >              “jck_simple_api” is a subset of the api suite we compiled for our own purposes. The tests contained therein are just “simple” tests: they do not run too long, they can run massively parallel, they do not depend on specific resources (like ports, addresses, …).
>      >
>      >              I’m afraid this doesn’t help you much. At least I tried. �� If you can’t reproduce on your own, please let us know what tracing you need. We could then try to produce the output on our test systems.
>      >
>      >              Thanks,
>      >              Lutz
>      >
>      >              From: Liu Xin <mailto:navy.xliu at gmail.com>
>      >              Date: Friday, 17. August 2018 at 17:15
>      >              To: "Haug, Gunter" <mailto:gunter.haug at sap.com>
>      >              Cc: "mailto:hotspot-runtime-dev at openjdk.java.net" <mailto:hotspot-runtime-dev at openjdk.java.net>, Lutz Schmidt <mailto:lutz.schmidt at sap.com>, "Doerr, Martin (mailto:martin.doerr at sap.com)" <mailto:martin.doerr at sap.com>, "mailto:xxinliu at amazon.com" <mailto:xxinliu at amazon.com>
>      >              Subject: Re: RFR (XS): 8208480: Fix for test failure: assert(is_bound() || is_unused()) after JDK-8206075 in C1
>      >
>      >              hi, Gunter,
>      >              I do consider bailout case. why didn't it catch your case?
>      >              c1_LIRAssember.hpp
>      >               // unified bailout support
>      >                void bailout(const char* msg) {
>      >                  // reset the label in case it hits assertion in destructor.
>      >                  _unwind_handler_entry.reset();
>      >                  compilation()->bailout(msg);
>      >                }
>      >
>      >              can I reproduce this jck_simple_api_work?
>      >              /priv/jvmtests/output_sapjvm12_o_jdk-test_dbgU_linuxs390x/jck_simple_api_work/hs_err_pid108809.log
>      >
>      >              On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 6:39 AM Haug, Gunter <mailto:gunter.haug at sap.com> wrote:
>      >              Hi all,
>      >
>      >              could I please have  a review and a sponsor for this tiny fix:
>      >
>      >              https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8208480
>      >              http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ghaug/webrevs/8208480
>      >
>      >              C1 holds a label to the unwind handler during compilation. There are bail-out paths where a branch to this label has already been emitted but the handler hasn't (e.g. code cache full). The label is therefore unbound when the destructor is invoked and the assertion fires.
>      >
>      >              Thanks,
>      >              Gunter
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      
> 


More information about the hotspot-runtime-dev mailing list