Skip to content
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

8254190: [s390] interpreter misses exception check after calling monitorenter #553

Closed

Conversation

@TheRealMDoerr
Copy link
Contributor

@TheRealMDoerr TheRealMDoerr commented Oct 7, 2020

The s390 template interpreter currently uses call_VM with check_exceptions = false when calling InterpreterRuntime::monitorenter, but there's a possibility to get an Exception.

See JIRA issue for details:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8254190


Progress

  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue
  • Change must be properly reviewed

Testing

Linux x64 Windows x64 macOS x64
Build ✔️ (3/3 passed) ✔️ (2/2 passed) ✔️ (2/2 passed)
Test (tier1) ✔️ (9/9 passed) ✔️ (9/9 passed) ✔️ (9/9 passed)

Issue

  • JDK-8254190: [s390] interpreter misses exception check after calling monitorenter

Reviewers

Download

$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/553/head:pull/553
$ git checkout pull/553

Copy link
Contributor

@shipilev shipilev left a comment

This makes sense. Looks good.

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

@bridgekeeper bridgekeeper bot commented Oct 8, 2020

👋 Welcome back mdoerr! 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 openjdk bot added the rfr label Oct 8, 2020
@openjdk
Copy link

@openjdk openjdk bot commented Oct 8, 2020

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

  • hotspot-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
Copy link

@mlbridge mlbridge bot commented Oct 8, 2020

Webrevs

Copy link
Contributor

@reinrich reinrich left a comment

The changes look good. Thanks!

@TheRealMDoerr TheRealMDoerr changed the title 8254190: [s390] interpreter misses exception check after calling moni… 8254190: [s390] interpreter misses exception check after calling monitorenter Oct 8, 2020
@openjdk
Copy link

@openjdk openjdk bot commented Oct 8, 2020

@TheRealMDoerr 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:

8254190: [s390] interpreter misses exception check after calling monitorenter

Reviewed-by: shade, rrich

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 22 new commits pushed to the master branch:

  • 5351ba6: 8254262: jdk.test.lib.Utils::createTemp* don't pass attrs
  • 8c0d3d7: 8254195: java/nio/file/Files/SubstDrive.java failed with "AssertionError: expected [144951656448] but found [144951640064]"
  • c2a5de6: 8253681: closed java/awt/dnd/MouseEventAfterStartDragTest/MouseEventAfterStartDragTest.html test failed
  • d036dca: 8254103: Shenandoah: Move updating thread roots to concurrent phase
  • 7e82ba1: 8254146: Avoid unnecessary volatile write on new AtomicBoolean(false)
  • 6d13c76: 8253191: C2: Masked byte comparisons with large masks produce wrong result on x86
  • a191c58: 8253404: C2: assert(C->live_nodes() <= C->max_node_limit()) failed: Live Node limit exceeded limit
  • 6bc4931: 8253717: Relocate stack overflow code out of thread.hpp/cpp
  • 782d45b: 8242882: opening jar file with large manifest might throw NegativeArraySizeException
  • f860372: 8253566: clazz.isAssignableFrom will return false for interface implementors
  • ... and 12 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/abe2593772af1301d1b9fbb8592b6b0db99bb0b9...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 openjdk bot added the ready label Oct 8, 2020
@TheRealMDoerr
Copy link
Contributor Author

@TheRealMDoerr TheRealMDoerr commented Oct 8, 2020

Thanks for the reviews.

@TheRealMDoerr
Copy link
Contributor Author

@TheRealMDoerr TheRealMDoerr commented Oct 8, 2020

/integrate

@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Oct 8, 2020
@openjdk openjdk bot added integrated and removed ready rfr labels Oct 8, 2020
@openjdk
Copy link

@openjdk openjdk bot commented Oct 8, 2020

@TheRealMDoerr Since your change was applied there have been 22 commits pushed to the master branch:

  • 5351ba6: 8254262: jdk.test.lib.Utils::createTemp* don't pass attrs
  • 8c0d3d7: 8254195: java/nio/file/Files/SubstDrive.java failed with "AssertionError: expected [144951656448] but found [144951640064]"
  • c2a5de6: 8253681: closed java/awt/dnd/MouseEventAfterStartDragTest/MouseEventAfterStartDragTest.html test failed
  • d036dca: 8254103: Shenandoah: Move updating thread roots to concurrent phase
  • 7e82ba1: 8254146: Avoid unnecessary volatile write on new AtomicBoolean(false)
  • 6d13c76: 8253191: C2: Masked byte comparisons with large masks produce wrong result on x86
  • a191c58: 8253404: C2: assert(C->live_nodes() <= C->max_node_limit()) failed: Live Node limit exceeded limit
  • 6bc4931: 8253717: Relocate stack overflow code out of thread.hpp/cpp
  • 782d45b: 8242882: opening jar file with large manifest might throw NegativeArraySizeException
  • f860372: 8253566: clazz.isAssignableFrom will return false for interface implementors
  • ... and 12 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/abe2593772af1301d1b9fbb8592b6b0db99bb0b9...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

Pushed as commit ced46b1.

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

@TheRealMDoerr TheRealMDoerr deleted the 8254190_s390_interp_fix branch Oct 8, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
3 participants