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

8316746: Top of lock-stack does not match the unlocked object #1977

Closed

Conversation

TheRealMDoerr
Copy link
Contributor

@TheRealMDoerr TheRealMDoerr commented Nov 20, 2023

Backport of JDK-8316746. Doesn't apply cleanly:

  • Comment cleanups for other platforms don't apply. Comment not there. Skipped.
  • Changes to monitorenter/exit had to be integrated manually because JDK17 uses BasicObjectLock::obj_offset_in_bytes() while head uses in_bytes(BasicObjectLock::obj_offset()).

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
  • JDK-8316746 needs maintainer approval

Issue

  • JDK-8316746: Top of lock-stack does not match the unlocked object (Bug - P2 - Approved)

Reviewers

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk17u-dev.git pull/1977/head:pull/1977
$ git checkout pull/1977

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/1977
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk17u-dev.git pull/1977/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 1977

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 1977

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk17u-dev/pull/1977.diff

Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Nov 20, 2023

👋 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 changed the title Backport 7d8adfa855e51a90c2f125fc20a06f9a488e6248 8316746: Top of lock-stack does not match the unlocked object Nov 20, 2023
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 20, 2023

This backport pull request has now been updated with issue from the original commit.

@openjdk openjdk bot added backport rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Nov 20, 2023
@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Nov 20, 2023

Webrevs

Copy link
Member

@reinrich reinrich left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've diffed the original commit and the backport. Looks good!
Thanks, Richard.

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 21, 2023

⚠️ @TheRealMDoerr This change is now ready for you to apply for maintainer approval. This can be done directly in each associated issue or by using the /approval command.

@TheRealMDoerr
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for the review!
/approval request C2 OSR compiled methods are wrong on PPC64 in very rare cases without this fix (wrong unlock order). This gets currently only detected by the new lightweight locking, but the bug exists independently. The fix has been tested in jdk head, jdk 21u and this backport in jdk 17u-dev in our nightly tests.

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 21, 2023

@TheRealMDoerr
8316746: The approval request has been created successfully.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the approval label Nov 21, 2023
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 22, 2023

@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:

8316746: Top of lock-stack does not match the unlocked object

Reviewed-by: 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 8 new commits pushed to the master branch:

  • 2da7aeb: 8310656: RISC-V: __builtin___clear_cache can fail silently.
  • 40c29f7: 8279856: Parallel: Use PreservedMarks to record promotion-failed objects
  • 2a37bae: 8262186: Call X509KeyManager.chooseClientAlias once for all key types
  • b7605b7: 8302109: Trivial fixes to btree tests
  • c478c81: 8292067: Convert test/sun/management/jmxremote/bootstrap shell tests to java version
  • e4ddf06: 8320053: GHA: Cross-compile gtest code
  • 3d9cb02: 8317834: java/lang/Thread/IsAlive.java timed out
  • db83123: 8316645: RISC-V: Remove dependency on libatomic by adding cmpxchg 1b

Please see this link for an up-to-date comparison between the source branch of this pull request and the master branch.
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 ready Pull request is ready to be integrated and removed approval labels Nov 22, 2023
@TheRealMDoerr
Copy link
Contributor Author

/integrate

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 22, 2023

Going to push as commit 0f2da83.
Since your change was applied there have been 8 commits pushed to the master branch:

  • 2da7aeb: 8310656: RISC-V: __builtin___clear_cache can fail silently.
  • 40c29f7: 8279856: Parallel: Use PreservedMarks to record promotion-failed objects
  • 2a37bae: 8262186: Call X509KeyManager.chooseClientAlias once for all key types
  • b7605b7: 8302109: Trivial fixes to btree tests
  • c478c81: 8292067: Convert test/sun/management/jmxremote/bootstrap shell tests to java version
  • e4ddf06: 8320053: GHA: Cross-compile gtest code
  • 3d9cb02: 8317834: java/lang/Thread/IsAlive.java timed out
  • db83123: 8316645: RISC-V: Remove dependency on libatomic by adding cmpxchg 1b

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Nov 22, 2023
@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Nov 22, 2023
@openjdk openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Nov 22, 2023
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 22, 2023

@TheRealMDoerr Pushed as commit 0f2da83.

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

@TheRealMDoerr TheRealMDoerr deleted the 8316746_lock_stack_PPC64 branch November 22, 2023 12:00
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backport integrated Pull request has been integrated
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants