-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.4k
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
8274196: Crashes in VM_HeapDumper::work after JDK-8252842 #5681
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
fca03cb
8274196: Crashes in VM_HeapDumper::work after JDK-8252842
linzang 2ccc4d2
Merge branch 'master' into pd-fix
linzang 91f1c34
un-ProblemList BasicJMapTest.java
linzang c1658e1
Add missing read barrier
f6cb212
remove redundant empty line
db77cda
remove load barrier for JNI local roots
linzang File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
If you change these locks to _safepoint_check_always, you have to acquire them without the Mutex::_no_safepoint_check flags so I don't know why you don't get that assert.
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 it may be because this is actually not a JavaThread. So the assert in
Mutex::check_no_safepoint_state
would pass.Moreover, I have tried to use
PaddedMonitor(Mutex::nosafepoint, "ParallelHProfWriter_lock", Mutex::_safepoint_check_never);
here, but the slowdebug would report errors as you mentioned in JDK-8274245.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 agree the flag here and at the place of lock acquiring seems problematic. I will try to see whether I can use
Mutex::_safepoint_check_never
here and get rid of the assert.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.
yes
void Mutex::check_no_safepoint_state(Thread* thread) {
check_block_state(thread);
assert(!thread->is_active_Java_thread() || _safepoint_check_required != _safepoint_check_always,
"This lock should always have a safepoint check for Java threads: %s",
name());
}
yes, we exclude the check for a non-java thread, which I thought was an odd exclusion last time I looked. I pass the tests in sun/tools/jmap/BasicJMapTest.java so maybe leave it for now?
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 agree, maybe a new issue could be created for tracking this.
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.
👍