On Thu, 17 Oct 2024 02:33:01 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn <sspit...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> There is a race between JVMTI NotifyFramePop function and FramePop event
>> posting code.
>> The fix is to return JVMTI_ERROR_OPAQUE_FRAME if if a FramePop event with
>> depth 0 is requested by NotifyFramePop at the time when the target frame is
>> in exit epilogue, and MethodExit/FramePop events are being posted for it.
>>
>> Testing:
>> - verified locally with new test (developed by Chris):
>> `serviceability/jvmti/events/NotifyFramePopStressTest`
>> - TBD: mach5 tiers 1-6
>
> Serguei Spitsyn has updated the pull request incrementally with one
> additional commit since the last revision:
>
> review test tweaks: add @bug tag; a reliability update
test/hotspot/jtreg/serviceability/jvmti/events/NotifyFramePopStressTest/libNotifyFramePopStressTest.cpp
line 62:
> 60: jmethodID method, jboolean wasPoppedByException) {
> 61: jvmtiError err;
> 62: char* expected_method = (char*)last_notify_method;
I don't think caching `last_notify_method` adds any reliability.
`notifyFramePop` deallocates the memory.
test/hotspot/jtreg/serviceability/jvmti/events/NotifyFramePopStressTest/libNotifyFramePopStressTest.cpp
line 87:
> 85: }
> 86: deallocate(jvmti, jni, csig);
> 87: deallocate(jvmti, jni, name);
on error `csig` and `name` are deallocated twice
test/hotspot/jtreg/serviceability/jvmti/events/NotifyFramePopStressTest/libNotifyFramePopStressTest.cpp
line 171:
> 169: } else {
> 170: char* old_notify_method = (char*)last_notify_method;
> 171: last_notify_method = name;
I don't think this adds reliability.
Control thread suspends main test thread before call this method. AFAIU suspend
cannot complete before FramePop callback is completed.
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21468#discussion_r1805369268
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21468#discussion_r1805370875
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21468#discussion_r1805388024
