Skip to content

Conversation

@vish-chan
Copy link
Contributor

@vish-chan vish-chan commented Nov 28, 2025

Backport of:

JDK-8361363 - ShenandoahAsserts::print_obj() does not work for forwarded objects and UseCompactObjectHeaders
This change fixes Shenandoah’s print_obj() so it correctly prints forwarded objects when compact object headers are enabled, instead of crashing by reading an invalid klass from the forwarding pointer.

Risk is Low as this is a clean backport and the changes are in diagnostic code.


Progress

  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue
  • JDK-8361363 needs maintainer approval

Issue

  • JDK-8361363: ShenandoahAsserts::print_obj() does not work for forwarded objects and UseCompactObjectHeaders (Bug - P4 - Approved)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk25u-dev.git pull/28/head:pull/28
$ git checkout pull/28

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/28
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk25u-dev.git pull/28/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 28

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 28

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk25u-dev/pull/28.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Nov 28, 2025

👋 Welcome back vish-chan! 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
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 28, 2025

@vish-chan 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:

8361363: ShenandoahAsserts::print_obj() does not work for forwarded objects and UseCompactObjectHeaders

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 3 new commits pushed to the master branch:

  • a3b1fb8: 8371316: Adjust assertion (GC pause time cannot be smaller than the sum of each phase) in G1GCPhaseTimes::print
  • 082ecfa: 8370393: Cleanup handling of ancient Windows versions from GetJavaProperties java_props_md
  • 5696531: 8343474: [updates] Customize README.md to specifics of update project

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.

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 changed the title Backport fe264676337cdef0d7477b0b57ff9d2fe8f9fc0f 8361363: ShenandoahAsserts::print_obj() does not work for forwarded objects and UseCompactObjectHeaders Nov 28, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 28, 2025

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

@openjdk openjdk bot added backport Port of a pull request already in a different code base clean Identical backport; no merge resolution required labels Nov 28, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 28, 2025

⚠️ @vish-chan 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.

@vish-chan
Copy link
Contributor Author

/approval request for backport of JDK-8361363 which fixes Shenandoah’s print_obj() so it correctly prints forwarded objects when compact object headers are enabled, instead of crashing by reading an invalid klass from the forwarding pointer.
Risk is Low as this is a clean backport and the changes are in diagnostic code.

@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Nov 28, 2025

Webrevs

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 28, 2025

@vish-chan
8361363: The approval request has been created successfully.

@openjdk openjdk bot added approval Requires approval; will be removed when approval is received ready Pull request is ready to be integrated and removed approval Requires approval; will be removed when approval is received labels Nov 28, 2025
@vish-chan
Copy link
Contributor Author

/integrate

@openjdk openjdk bot added the sponsor Pull request is ready to be sponsored label Nov 28, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 28, 2025

@vish-chan
Your change (at version a955fe3) is now ready to be sponsored by a Committer.

@phohensee
Copy link
Member

/sponsor

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 30, 2025

Going to push as commit 2121b3b.
Since your change was applied there have been 3 commits pushed to the master branch:

  • a3b1fb8: 8371316: Adjust assertion (GC pause time cannot be smaller than the sum of each phase) in G1GCPhaseTimes::print
  • 082ecfa: 8370393: Cleanup handling of ancient Windows versions from GetJavaProperties java_props_md
  • 5696531: 8343474: [updates] Customize README.md to specifics of update project

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Nov 30, 2025
@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Nov 30, 2025
@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 Nov 30, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 30, 2025

@phohensee @vish-chan Pushed as commit 2121b3b.

💡 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 Port of a pull request already in a different code base clean Identical backport; no merge resolution required integrated Pull request has been integrated

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants