JVM/TI code review request (XS and M) (7182152) (original) (raw)

Daniel D. Daugherty daniel.daugherty at oracle.com
Mon Feb 4 11:54:59 PST 2013

On 2/4/13 12:21 PM, serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com wrote:

Dan,

The fixes look good for all 3 HS versions (modulo discussions with Coleen and Karen). Great discovery, thank you for doing this!

Thanks Serguei!

I'm working on addressing Coleen's and Karen's comments and will be rolling out three new webrevs...

Dan

Thanks, Serguei

On 2/1/13 11:55 AM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: Greetings, I have a fix for the following JVM/TI bug: 7182152 Instrumentation hot swap test incorrect monitor count http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/viewbug.do?bugid=7182152 https://jbs.oracle.com/bugs/browse/JDK-7182152 The fix for the bug in the product code is one line: src/share/vm/oops/klassVtable.cpp: @@ -992,18 +1020,50 @@ // RCTRACE macro has an embedded ResourceMark RCTRACE(0x00200000, ("itable method update: %s(%s)", newmethod->name()->asCstring(), newmethod->signature()->asCstring())); } - break; + // cannot 'break' here; see for-loop comment above. } ime++; } } } and is applicable to JDK7u10/HSX-23.6 and JDK7u14/HSX-24. Coleen already fixed the bug as part of the Perm Gen Removal (PGR) project in HSX-25. Yes, we found a 1-line bug fix buried in the monster PGR changeset. Many thanks to Coleen for her help in this bug hunt! The rest of the code in the webrevs are: - additional JVM/TI tracing code backported from Coleen's PGR changeset - additional JVM/TI tracing code added by me and forward ported to HSX-25 - a new -XX:TraceRedefineClasses=16384 flag value for finding these elusive old or obsolete methods - exposure of some printing code to the PRODUCT build so that the new tracing is available in a PRODUCT build You might be wondering why the new tracing code is exposed in a PRODUCT build. Well, it appears that more and more PRODUCT bits deployments are using JVM/TI RedefineClasses() and/or RetransformClasses() at run-time to instrument their systems. This bug (7182152) was only intermittently reproducible in the WLS environment in which it occurred so I made the tracing available in a PRODUCT build to assist in the hunt. Raj from the WLS team has also verified that the HSX-23.6 version of fix resolves the issue in his environment. Thanks Raj! Here are the URLs for the three webrevs: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dcubed/7182152-webrev/0-hsx23.6/ http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dcubed/7182152-webrev/0-hsx24/ http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dcubed/7182152-webrev/0-hsx25/ I have run the following test suites from the JPDA stack on the JDK7u10/HSX-23.6 version of the fix with -XX:TraceRedefineClasses=16384 specified: sdk-jdi sdk-jdiclosed sdk-jli vm-heapdump vm-hprof vm-jdb vm-jdi vm-jdwp vm-jvmti vm-sajdi The tested configs are: {Solaris-X86, WinXP} X {Client VM, Server VM} X {-Xmixed, -Xcomp} X {product, fastdebug} With the 1-liner fix in place, the new tracing code does not find any instances of this failure mode in any of the above test suites. Without the the 1-liner fix in place, the new tracing code finds one instance of this failure mode in the above test suites: test/java/lang/instrument/IsModifiableClassAgent.java There are two new tests that will be pushed to the JDK repos using a different bug ID (not yet filed): test/com/sun/jdi/RedefineAbstractClass.sh test/java/lang/instrument/RedefineSubclassWithTwoInterfaces.sh There will be a separate review request for the new tests. I'm currently running the JPDA stack of tests on the JDK7u14/HSX-24 and JDK8-B75/HSX-25 versions of the fix. That testing will likely take all weekend to complete. Thanks, in advance, for any comments and/or suggestions. Dan

More information about the serviceability-dev mailing list