Skip to content

8364159: Shenandoah assertions after JDK-8361712 #26513

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

Conversation

tstuefe
Copy link
Member

@tstuefe tstuefe commented Jul 28, 2025

In ShenandoahAsserts::extract_klass_safely, we attempt to carefully extract the Klass for an object and trip over our own feet doing this. We load the Markword twice: once to read "is_marked" and get the forwardee, once to extract the narrowKlass.

If between the first and the second load we did evacuate the object concurrently, this happens:

T1 : fwd = SheandoahForwarding::get_forwardee_raw_unchecked(obj) => obj unmarked => (fwd == obj)
T2 : (installs forwarding pointer in obj)
T1: read markword from fwd again, (fwd == obj) => reads markword from forwarded obj, interprets the zeros in the upper part of the forwardee address as narrowKlass == 0, asserts

The solution is - as ShenandoahForwarding::klass() already does - to load the MW from original obj only once. Patch does that.


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

Issue

  • JDK-8364159: Shenandoah assertions after JDK-8361712 (Bug - P3)

Reviewers

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/26513/head:pull/26513
$ git checkout pull/26513

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/26513
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/26513/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 26513

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 26513

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26513.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Jul 28, 2025

👋 Welcome back stuefe! 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 Jul 28, 2025

@tstuefe 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:

8364159: Shenandoah assertions after JDK-8361712

Reviewed-by: mbaesken, shade

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 34 new commits pushed to 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
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jul 28, 2025

@tstuefe The following labels will be automatically applied to this pull request:

  • hotspot-gc
  • shenandoah

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing lists. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

@tstuefe
Copy link
Member Author

tstuefe commented Jul 29, 2025

MacOS error unrelated

@tstuefe tstuefe marked this pull request as ready for review July 29, 2025 04:36
@openjdk openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Jul 29, 2025
@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Jul 29, 2025

Webrevs

Copy link
Member

@MBaesken MBaesken left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for fixing this, I checked for similar code locations but could not find any (hope I did not overlook something).
The fix fixes our various asserts we saw across jtreg HS tests when enabling CompressedObjectHeaders by default,

@openjdk openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Jul 29, 2025
@tstuefe
Copy link
Member Author

tstuefe commented Jul 29, 2025

Thanks @MBaesken ! My own tests are also clean now.

Any shenandoah devs willing to give me a quick review?

Copy link
Member

@shipilev shipilev left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, please integrate. Seeing failure in current testing as well.

@tstuefe
Copy link
Member Author

tstuefe commented Jul 30, 2025

/integrate

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jul 30, 2025

Going to push as commit 317dacc.
Since your change was applied there have been 35 commits pushed to the master branch:

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Jul 30, 2025
@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Jul 30, 2025
@openjdk openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Jul 30, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jul 30, 2025

@tstuefe Pushed as commit 317dacc.

💡 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
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants