Closed
Bug 1209026
Opened 10 years ago
Closed 10 years ago
Crash [@ js::jit::AssemblerX86Shared::bind]
Categories
(Core :: JavaScript Engine, defect)
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
mozilla44
| Tracking | Status | |
|---|---|---|
| firefox44 | --- | fixed |
People
(Reporter: decoder, Assigned: jandem)
References
Details
(Keywords: crash, regression, testcase, Whiteboard: [fuzzblocker] [jsbugmon:update,ignore])
Crash Data
Attachments
(1 file)
|
3.36 KB,
patch
|
jonco
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
The following testcase crashes on mozilla-central revision 6256ec9113c1 (build with --enable-optimize --enable-posix-nspr-emulation --enable-valgrind --enable-gczeal --disable-tests --enable-debug, run with --fuzzing-safe --thread-count=2 --ion-eager --ion-extra-checks --baseline-eager):
function oomTest(f) {
var i = 1;
var more;
do {
try {
oomAtAllocation(i);
f();
more = resetOOMFailure();
} catch (e) {
more = resetOOMFailure();
}
i++;
} while(more);
}
oomTest(() => getBacktrace({
thisprops: gc() && delete addDebuggee.enabled
}));
Backtrace:
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
[Switching to Thread 0x7ffff5ac2700 (LWP 25832)]
js::jit::AssemblerX86Shared::bind (this=0x7ffff47c9058, label=0x0) at js/src/jit/x86-shared/Assembler-x86-shared.h:932
#0 js::jit::AssemblerX86Shared::bind (this=0x7ffff47c9058, label=0x0) at js/src/jit/x86-shared/Assembler-x86-shared.h:932
#1 0x0000000000930205 in js::jit::CodeGenerator::getJumpLabelForBranch (this=this@entry=0x7ffff47c9000, block=0x7ffff47f0598) at js/src/jit/CodeGenerator.cpp:664
#2 0x00000000009530e2 in js::jit::CodeGenerator::visitTestVAndBranch (this=0x7ffff47c9000, lir=0x7ffff69ecc60) at js/src/jit/CodeGenerator.cpp:709
#3 0x0000000000991946 in js::jit::CodeGenerator::generateBody (this=this@entry=0x7ffff47c9000) at js/src/jit/CodeGenerator.cpp:4149
#4 0x000000000099207a in js::jit::CodeGenerator::generate (this=this@entry=0x7ffff47c9000) at js/src/jit/CodeGenerator.cpp:7859
#5 0x0000000000992291 in js::jit::GenerateCode (mir=mir@entry=0x7ffff47ed258, lir=0x7ffff69e9980) at js/src/jit/Ion.cpp:1954
#6 0x0000000000992385 in js::jit::CompileBackEnd (mir=0x7ffff47ed258) at js/src/jit/Ion.cpp:1976
#7 0x00000000006668dd in js::HelperThread::handleIonWorkload (this=this@entry=0x7ffff6933a78) at js/src/vm/HelperThreads.cpp:1156
#8 0x000000000066789a in js::HelperThread::threadLoop (this=0x7ffff6933a78) at js/src/vm/HelperThreads.cpp:1458
#9 0x00000000006b9911 in nspr::Thread::ThreadRoutine (arg=0x7ffff6931180) at js/src/vm/PosixNSPR.cpp:45
#10 0x00007ffff7bc4182 in start_thread (arg=0x7ffff5ac2700) at pthread_create.c:312
#11 0x00007ffff6cb3fbd in clone () at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/clone.S:111
rax 0x0 0
rbx 0x0 0
rcx 0xa 10
rdx 0x400 1024
rsi 0xe0a9aa 14723498
rdi 0xa 10
rbp 0x7ffff5ac1a60 140737315084896
rsp 0x7ffff5ac1a10 140737315084816
r8 0xe0bab8 14727864
r9 0xe0d574 14734708
r10 0x7ffff47c9998 140737295194520
r11 0xa010eb80 2685463424
r12 0x29cb 10699
r13 0x29cb 10699
r14 0x7ffff47f0598 140737295353240
r15 0x7ffff47c9058 140737295192152
rip 0x5b9382 <js::jit::AssemblerX86Shared::bind(js::jit::Label*)+82>
=> 0x5b9382 <js::jit::AssemblerX86Shared::bind(js::jit::Label*)+82>: cmpb $0x0,0x3(%rbx)
0x5b9386 <js::jit::AssemblerX86Shared::bind(js::jit::Label*)+86>: jns 0x5b9390 <js::jit::AssemblerX86Shared::bind(js::jit::Label*)+96>
Marking as fuzzblocker because I see more crashes related to this that I cannot easily match with a signature.
| Assignee | ||
Comment 1•10 years ago
|
||
Hm this might be related to a topcrash with that signature. Will take a look today.
Flags: needinfo?(jdemooij)
| Assignee | ||
Comment 2•10 years ago
|
||
Use infallible allocation for Labels.
Assignee: nobody → jdemooij
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Flags: needinfo?(jdemooij)
Attachment #8666685 -
Flags: review?(jcoppeard)
Comment 3•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8666685 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch
Review of attachment 8666685 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Looks good.
::: js/src/jit-test/tests/gc/oomInGetJumpLabelForBranch.js
@@ +1,1 @@
> +// |jit-test| allow-unhandlable-oom; allow-oom
We don't need this, or possibly it should just be "|jit-test| --no-threads" only.
The test should catch the OOM so we don't want 'allow-oom' and we don't need 'allow-unhandlable-oom' because the framework skips those allocations.
Attachment #8666685 -
Flags: review?(jcoppeard) → review+
Updated•10 years ago
|
Whiteboard: [jsbugmon:update,bisect][fuzzblocker] → [fuzzblocker] [jsbugmon:update]
Comment 4•10 years ago
|
||
JSBugMon: Bisection requested, result:
autoBisect shows this is probably related to the following changeset:
The first bad revision is:
changeset: https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/6ffa14c65354
user: Jon Coppeard
date: Fri May 22 18:52:38 2015 +0100
summary: Bug 1155618 - Add better support for testing OOM behaviour r=terrence
This iteration took 193.000 seconds to run.
Updated•10 years ago
|
Whiteboard: [fuzzblocker] [jsbugmon:update] → [fuzzblocker] [jsbugmon:update,ignore]
Comment 5•10 years ago
|
||
JSBugMon: The testcase found in this bug no longer reproduces (tried revision 891ee0d0ba3e).
| Assignee | ||
Comment 6•10 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Jon Coppeard (:jonco) from comment #3)
> > +// |jit-test| allow-unhandlable-oom; allow-oom
>
> We don't need this, or possibly it should just be "|jit-test| --no-threads"
> only.
The "allow-unhandlable-oom" was because we hit the CrashAtUnhandlableOOM in ExceptionHandlerBailout, but bug 1210760 should fix that :) Will do another try push to confirm.
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 10 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla44
Hi Jan, this crash signature is ranked #4 in top crashers on 45 Release. Would you be able to help investigate the reports and see if there any useful information in the latest crash reports? Thanks!
Flags: needinfo?(jdemooij)
| Assignee | ||
Comment 11•9 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Ritu Kothari (:ritu) from comment #10)
> Hi Jan, this crash signature is ranked #4 in top crashers on 45 Release.
> Would you be able to help investigate the reports and see if there any
> useful information in the latest crash reports? Thanks!
Thanks for the reminder. I'll move this NI to bug 1124397.
Flags: needinfo?(jdemooij)
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•