8332106: VerifyError when using switch pattern in this(...) or super(...) #19217

lahodaj · 2024-05-13T14:37:49Z

Considering code like:

public class Test {

    public Test(int i) {
    }

    public Test(Object o) {
        this(o instanceof R(String s) ? s.length() : -1);
    }

    public static void main(String... args) {}

    record R(String s) {}
}

Running this crashes:

$ java .../Test.java
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.VerifyError: Stack map does not match the one at exception handler 36
Exception Details:
  Location:
    Test.<init>(Ljava/lang/Object;)V @36: astore_2
  Reason:
    Type uninitializedThis (current frame, locals[0]) is not assignable to 'Test' (stack map, locals[0])
  Current Frame:
    bci: @14
    flags: { flagThisUninit }
    locals: { uninitializedThis, 'java/lang/Object', top, 'Test$R' }
    stack: { 'java/lang/Throwable' }
  Stackmap Frame:
    bci: @36
    flags: { }
    locals: { 'Test', 'java/lang/Object' }
    stack: { 'java/lang/Throwable' }
  Bytecode:
    0000000: 2a2b c100 0799 0018 2bc0 0007 4e2d b600
    0000010: 093a 0419 044d 2cb6 000d a700 0402 b700
    0000020: 13a7 0011 4dbb 001a 592c b600 1c2c b700
    0000030: 1fbf b1                                
  Exception Handler Table:
    bci [14, 17] => handler: 36
  Stackmap Table:
    same_locals_1_stack_item_frame(@29,UninitializedThis)
    full_frame(@30,{UninitializedThis,Object[#2]},{UninitializedThis,Integer})
    full_frame(@36,{Object[#20],Object[#2]},{Object[#24]})
    same_frame(@50)

        at java.base/java.lang.Class.forName0(Native Method)
        at java.base/java.lang.Class.forName(Class.java:534)
        at java.base/java.lang.Class.forName(Class.java:513)
        at jdk.compiler/com.sun.tools.javac.launcher.Main.execute(Main.java:432)
        at jdk.compiler/com.sun.tools.javac.launcher.Main.run(Main.java:208)
        at jdk.compiler/com.sun.tools.javac.launcher.Main.main(Main.java:135)

The reason is that there is a synthetic catch generated wrapping the record accessors inside the pattern matching. The range where the exception this catch is catching is before the real this(...) invokespecial, and hence the this is still an "uninitialized this". But the code for the catch is generated at the end of the constructor, when this is already initialized, and javac generates the stack maps as if this was initialized.

In general, the pattern matching code can be both before and after the this has been initialized. But, I don't think a stack map frame can be generated for the handler originating in places with both "uninitialized this " and (initialized) this.

The proposal here is to generate one set of the catch handlers for the state with "uninitialized this", and another for (initialized) this, if needed.

Progress

Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
Commit message must refer to an issue

Issue

JDK-8332106: VerifyError when using switch pattern in this(...) or super(...) (Bug - P2)

Reviewers

Aggelos Biboudis (@biboudis - Committer) ⚠️ Review applies to 9dacde8b
Vicente Romero (@vicente-romero-oracle - Reviewer) ⚠️ Review applies to 9dacde8b

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19217/head:pull/19217
$ git checkout pull/19217

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/19217
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19217/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 19217

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 19217

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19217.diff

Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

…...)

bridgekeeper · 2024-05-13T14:38:24Z

👋 Welcome back jlahoda! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

openjdk · 2024-05-13T14:39:07Z

@lahodaj 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:

8332106: VerifyError when using switch pattern in this(...) or super(...)

Reviewed-by: abimpoudis, vromero

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 114 new commits pushed to the master branch:

c2180d1: 8315767: InetAddress: constructing objects from BSD literal addresses
2a11e0d: 8332743: Update comment related to JDK-8320522
6829d9a: 8332122: [nmt] Totals for malloc should show total peak
9d332e6: 8307193: Several Swing jtreg tests use class.forName on L&F classes
98f6a80: 8332490: JMH org.openjdk.bench.java.util.zip.InflaterInputStreams.inflaterInputStreamRead OOM
3d4185a: 8332739: Problemlist compiler/codecache/CheckLargePages until JDK-8332654 is fixed
c4557a7: 8332463: Byte conditional pattern case element dominates short constant case element
d59c12f: 8329718: Incorrect @since tags in elements in jdk.compiler and java.compiler
b4d1454: 8332740: [BACKOUT] JDK-8331081 'internal proprietary API' diagnostics if --system is configured to an earlier JDK version
37c4778: 8332096: hotspot-ide-project fails with this-escape
... and 104 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/1484153c1a092cefc20270b35aa1e508280843a4...master

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 master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

openjdk · 2024-05-13T14:39:33Z

@lahodaj The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

compiler

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.

mlbridge · 2024-05-13T14:43:01Z

Webrevs

biboudis · 2024-05-14T09:07:15Z

test/langtools/tools/javac/patterns/UninitializedThisException.java

+import java.util.Objects;
+import java.util.function.Supplier;
+
+public class UninitializedThisException {


nit: It would be nice to have a test for super(...) as well even though I am confident that it works. Feel free to ignore if there is no need for an extra test.

Tests enahanced: 9dacde8

biboudis

LGTM

vicente-romero-oracle · 2024-05-14T20:05:24Z

src/jdk.compiler/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/jvm/Gen.java

-    Set<JCMethodInvocation> invocationsWithPatternMatchingCatch = Set.of();
-    ListBuffer<int[]> patternMatchingInvocationRanges;
+    PatternMatchingCatchConfigration patternMatchingCatchConfiguration =
+            new PatternMatchingCatchConfigration(Set.of(), null, null, null);


typo: Configuration

vicente-romero-oracle

looks sensible

lahodaj · 2024-05-24T06:27:09Z

/integrate

openjdk · 2024-05-24T06:27:47Z

Going to push as commit af056c1.
Since your change was applied there have been 133 commits pushed to the master branch:

da3001d: 8331975: Enable case-insensitive check in ccache and keytab entry lookup
424eb60: 8331683: Clean up GetCarrierThread
9b1d6d6: 8316328: Test jdk/jfr/event/oldobject/TestSanityDefault.java times out for some heap sizes
f8a3e4e: 8328998: Encoding support for Intel APX extended general-purpose registers
ddd73b4: 8332082: Shenandoah: Use consistent tests to determine when pre-write barrier is active
0a9d1f8: 8332749: Broken link in MemorySegment.Scope.html
c9a7b97: 8332829: [BACKOUT] C2: crash in compiled code because of dependency on removed range check CastIIs
7fd9d6c: 8332340: Add JavacBench as a test case for CDS
417d174: 8331348: Some incremental builds deposit files in the make directory
303ac9f: 8332671: Logging for pretouching thread stacks shows wrong memory range
... and 123 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/1484153c1a092cefc20270b35aa1e508280843a4...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

openjdk · 2024-05-24T06:27:52Z

@lahodaj Pushed as commit af056c1.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.

8332106: VerifyError when using switch pattern in this(...) or super(…

3015dfd

…...)

openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label May 13, 2024

openjdk bot added the compiler compiler-dev@openjdk.org label May 13, 2024

biboudis reviewed May 14, 2024

View reviewed changes

Enhancing test as suggested.

9dacde8

biboudis approved these changes May 15, 2024

View reviewed changes

lahodaj changed the title ~~8332106: VerifyError when using switch pattern in this(...) or super(…)~~ 8332106: VerifyError when using switch pattern in this(...) or super(...) May 16, 2024

vicente-romero-oracle reviewed May 17, 2024

View reviewed changes

vicente-romero-oracle approved these changes May 18, 2024

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label May 18, 2024

Fixing typo.

c10940d

openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label May 24, 2024

openjdk bot closed this May 24, 2024

openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels May 24, 2024

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

8332106: VerifyError when using switch pattern in this(...) or super(...) #19217

8332106: VerifyError when using switch pattern in this(...) or super(...) #19217

lahodaj commented May 13, 2024 •

edited by openjdk bot

Loading

bridgekeeper bot commented May 13, 2024

openjdk bot commented May 13, 2024 •

edited

Loading

openjdk bot commented May 13, 2024

mlbridge bot commented May 13, 2024 •

edited

Loading

biboudis May 14, 2024

lahodaj May 15, 2024

biboudis left a comment

vicente-romero-oracle May 14, 2024

vicente-romero-oracle left a comment

lahodaj commented May 24, 2024

openjdk bot commented May 24, 2024

openjdk bot commented May 24, 2024

8332106: VerifyError when using switch pattern in this(...) or super(...) #19217

8332106: VerifyError when using switch pattern in this(...) or super(...) #19217

Conversation

lahodaj commented May 13, 2024 • edited by openjdk bot Loading

Progress

Issue

Reviewers

Reviewing

Webrev

bridgekeeper bot commented May 13, 2024

openjdk bot commented May 13, 2024 • edited Loading

openjdk bot commented May 13, 2024

mlbridge bot commented May 13, 2024 • edited Loading

Webrevs

biboudis May 14, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

lahodaj May 15, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

biboudis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

vicente-romero-oracle May 14, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

vicente-romero-oracle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

lahodaj commented May 24, 2024

openjdk bot commented May 24, 2024

openjdk bot commented May 24, 2024

lahodaj commented May 13, 2024 •

edited by openjdk bot

Loading

openjdk bot commented May 13, 2024 •

edited

Loading

mlbridge bot commented May 13, 2024 •

edited

Loading