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

8323086: Shenandoah: Heap could be corrupted by oom during evacuation #2114

Conversation

earthling-amzn
Copy link

@earthling-amzn earthling-amzn commented Jan 8, 2024


Progress

  • JDK-8323086 needs maintainer approval
  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue

Issue

  • JDK-8323086: Shenandoah: Heap could be corrupted by oom during evacuation (Bug - P3 - Approved)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk17u-dev.git pull/2114/head:pull/2114
$ git checkout pull/2114

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/2114
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk17u-dev.git pull/2114/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 2114

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 2114

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk17u-dev/pull/2114.diff

Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Jan 8, 2024

👋 Welcome back wkemper! 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 c4a83bd6f6c45e72bd776e929005be0aa9408867 8323086: Shenandoah: Heap could be corrupted by oom during evacuation Jan 8, 2024
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jan 8, 2024

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

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jan 8, 2024

⚠️ @earthling-amzn 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.

@openjdk openjdk bot added rfr Pull request is ready for review approval labels Jan 8, 2024
@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Jan 8, 2024

Webrevs

@openjdk openjdk bot removed the approval label Jan 15, 2024
@GoeLin
Copy link
Member

GoeLin commented Jan 15, 2024

@earthling-amzn I removed the fix-request tag.
Please label again when we develop 17.0.12.
Also, please follow https://wiki.openjdk.org/display/JDKUpdates/How+to+contribute+or+backport+a+fix in your fix-request comment.

@shipilev
Copy link
Member

I think the part of the missing background here (which would really be in fix-request) is that we have been running with this patch in GenShen for quite a while. So this is not really a new patch, it fixes an important corner case, and so I think it would be useful to have in current 17u (17.0.11). @GoeLin, can we still do it? @earthling-amzn should probably re-request with the much better fix-request.

@earthling-amzn
Copy link
Author

/approval request Please accept my apologies for the previously terse approval request. We discovered this issue almost two years ago during development of the generational mode for Shenandoah (which, at the time was more prone to out of memory errors during evacuation). Originally, it wasn't clear to us that the bug affected the upstream branch. We've been running this code in various internal customer test environments for the past two years. Additionally, we have nightly automated tests that run the latest Dacapo, Heapothesys, Extremem, SpecJBB1015, SpecJVM2008, and Diluvian benchmarks in both the release configuration, and a fastdebug configuration with GC stress flags enabled.

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jan 23, 2024

@earthling-amzn
8323086: The approval request has been created successfully.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the approval label Jan 23, 2024
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jan 24, 2024

@earthling-amzn 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:

8323086: Shenandoah: Heap could be corrupted by oom during evacuation

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 49 new commits pushed to the master branch:

  • 4f80edf: 8324184: Windows VS2010 build failed with "error C2275: 'int64_t'"
  • c774469: 8272811: Document the effects of building with _GNU_SOURCE in os_posix.hpp
  • 5a8af23: 8281543: Remove unused code/headerfile dtraceAttacher.hpp
  • ab3d1d0: 8323243: JNI invocation of an abstract instance method corrupts the stack
  • cac0e96: 8319436: Proxy.newProxyInstance throws NPE if loader is null and interface not visible from class loader
  • 1425971: 8322321: Add man page doc for -XX:+VerifySharedSpaces
  • 5b2aec6: 8318490: Increase timeout for JDK tests that are close to the limit when run with libgraal
  • 67aa1de: 8319213: Compatibility.java reads both stdout and stderr of JdkUtils
  • b4f1deb: 8312428: PKCS11 tests fail with NSS 3.91
  • b186446: 8317039: Enable specifying the JDK used to run jtreg
  • ... and 39 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk17u-dev/compare/1f95796210bd8389c6b599a6ce00c5ae7c2c4f4d...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.

As you do not have Committer status in this project an existing Committer must agree to sponsor your change.

➡️ To flag this PR as ready for integration with the above commit message, type /integrate in a new comment. (Afterwards, your sponsor types /sponsor in a new comment to perform the integration).

@openjdk openjdk bot added ready Pull request is ready to be integrated and removed approval labels Jan 24, 2024
@earthling-amzn
Copy link
Author

/integrate

@openjdk openjdk bot added the sponsor Pull request is ready to be sponsored label Jan 24, 2024
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jan 24, 2024

@earthling-amzn
Your change (at version 12cd3ec) is now ready to be sponsored by a Committer.

@shipilev
Copy link
Member

/sponsor

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jan 24, 2024

Going to push as commit cb3bd49.
Since your change was applied there have been 49 commits pushed to the master branch:

  • 4f80edf: 8324184: Windows VS2010 build failed with "error C2275: 'int64_t'"
  • c774469: 8272811: Document the effects of building with _GNU_SOURCE in os_posix.hpp
  • 5a8af23: 8281543: Remove unused code/headerfile dtraceAttacher.hpp
  • ab3d1d0: 8323243: JNI invocation of an abstract instance method corrupts the stack
  • cac0e96: 8319436: Proxy.newProxyInstance throws NPE if loader is null and interface not visible from class loader
  • 1425971: 8322321: Add man page doc for -XX:+VerifySharedSpaces
  • 5b2aec6: 8318490: Increase timeout for JDK tests that are close to the limit when run with libgraal
  • 67aa1de: 8319213: Compatibility.java reads both stdout and stderr of JdkUtils
  • b4f1deb: 8312428: PKCS11 tests fail with NSS 3.91
  • b186446: 8317039: Enable specifying the JDK used to run jtreg
  • ... and 39 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk17u-dev/compare/1f95796210bd8389c6b599a6ce00c5ae7c2c4f4d...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Jan 24, 2024
@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Jan 24, 2024
@openjdk openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review sponsor Pull request is ready to be sponsored labels Jan 24, 2024
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jan 24, 2024

@shipilev @earthling-amzn Pushed as commit cb3bd49.

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

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backport clean integrated Pull request has been integrated
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants