-
Couldn't load subscription status.
- Fork 6.1k
8316130: Incorrect control in LibraryCallKit::inline_native_notify_jvmti_funcs #15713
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
|
👋 Welcome back thartmann! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into |
|
@TobiHartmann The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:
When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing list. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command. |
Webrevs
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good to me.
|
@TobiHartmann This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks. ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details. After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be: You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed. At the time when this comment was updated there had been 19 new commits pushed to the
As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details. ➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the |
|
Thanks for the review, Roland! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think you can then remove vt_oop in the else branch which now shadows the outside vt_oop. I guess it is correct to have must_be_not_null() for both branches.
|
Good catch, Christian! Fixed. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good!
|
Thanks, Christian! |
|
/integrate |
|
Going to push as commit 4b65483.
Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts. |
|
@TobiHartmann Pushed as commit 4b65483. 💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored. |
We hit an assert during loop opts because the control input fed into
must_be_not_nullinLibraryCallKit::inline_native_notify_jvmti_funcsis wrong. The problem is that control is obtained from theGraphKitwhile it's been updated via theIdealKit. I simply moved themust_be_not_nullout of the if branch and to beforeIdealKitcreation, similar to what we do for other intrinsics.The original reproducer requires JFR and changes to core libraries (see JBS for details) and I was not able to extract a standalone reproducer. I don't think it's worth it because the required core libraries changes will be integrated separately and then the existing test will trigger the issue (with JFR).
Thanks,
Tobias
Progress
Issue
Reviewers
Reviewing
Using
gitCheckout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/15713/head:pull/15713$ git checkout pull/15713Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/15713$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/15713/headUsing Skara CLI tools
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 15713View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 15713Using diff file
Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15713.diff
Webrev
Link to Webrev Comment