Closed
Bug 1266366
Opened 9 years ago
Closed 8 years ago
[ppc64] [ppc64le] 45.1.0 ESR build fails because class js::jit::MacroAssembler has no member named 'branch64'
Categories
(Core :: JavaScript Engine: JIT, defect)
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
Tracking | Status | |
---|---|---|
firefox45 | --- | unaffected |
firefox46 | + | fixed |
firefox47 | --- | unaffected |
firefox48 | --- | unaffected |
firefox-esr38 | --- | unaffected |
firefox-esr45 | --- | fixed |
People
(Reporter: jhorak, Assigned: nbp)
References
Details
Attachments
(1 file)
1.99 KB,
patch
|
h4writer
:
review+
lizzard
:
approval-mozilla-release+
Sylvestre
:
approval-mozilla-esr45+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
We've hit following issue with Firefox 45.1.0 ESR build on ppc64 and ppc64le:
In file included from /builddir/build/BUILD/firefox-45.1.0/firefox-45.1.0esr/objdir/js/src/Unified_cpp_js_src13.cpp:2:0:
/builddir/build/BUILD/firefox-45.1.0/firefox-45.1.0esr/js/src/jit/IonCaches.cpp: In function 'void CheckDOMProxyExpandoDoesNotShadow(JSContext*, js::jit::MacroAssembler&, JSObject*, jsid, js::jit::Register, js::jit::Label*)':
/builddir/build/BUILD/firefox-45.1.0/firefox-45.1.0esr/js/src/jit/IonCaches.cpp:702:14: error: 'class js::jit::MacroAssembler' has no member named 'branch64'
masm.branch64(Assembler::NotEqual,
^
It seems that it was cased by https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1246061 (this change http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/diff/967dcb05f347/js/src/jit/IonCaches.cpp#l703 ).
Firefox 45.0.2 ESR build under same conditions is fine.
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•9 years ago
|
||
This is a problem in the backported patch, which lacks definition of the branch64 function in the none macro assembler. I will make a patch in a few minutes.
Assignee | ||
Comment 2•9 years ago
|
||
Attachment #8743851 -
Flags: review?(hv1989)
Assignee | ||
Updated•9 years ago
|
Blocks: CVE-2016-2808
Assignee | ||
Updated•9 years ago
|
status-firefox45:
--- → unaffected
status-firefox46:
--- → affected
status-firefox47:
--- → unaffected
status-firefox48:
--- → unaffected
status-firefox-esr38:
--- → unaffected
status-firefox-esr45:
--- → affected
Updated•9 years ago
|
Attachment #8743851 -
Flags: review?(hv1989) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•9 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8743851 [details] [diff] [review]
Add branch64 functions to the none-backend MacroAssembler.
[Approval Request Comment]
If this is not a sec:{high,crit} bug, please state case for ESR consideration:
Bug 1246061 caused a compilation issue on builds with disabled jit.
User impact if declined: Cannot compile.
Fix Landed on Version: N/A
Risk to taking this patch (and alternatives if risky): N/A
String or UUID changes made by this patch: N/A
Attachment #8743851 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-esr45?
Attachment #8743851 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-beta?
Updated•9 years ago
|
Assignee: nobody → nicolas.b.pierron
Comment 4•9 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8743851 [details] [diff] [review]
Add branch64 functions to the none-backend MacroAssembler.
Taking it for 45.2.0.
It might be in 45.1.0 if we find a driver for a second build.
This missed 46 RC2, if we do a RC3, we could take it but this is Liz's call.
Attachment #8743851 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-release?
Attachment #8743851 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-esr45?
Attachment #8743851 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-esr45+
Attachment #8743851 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-beta?
Comment 5•9 years ago
|
||
Bah, sorry for missing these. Backport was a little beastly here because of significant trunk code improvements, and as the trunk patch didn't (because of that) have none-arch changes, I didn't remember I needed to make them explicitly in backports.
I also didn't make these explicit changes in the ESR38 backport. Is it necessary to fix that, or is ESR38 sufficiently Johnny-come-lately that the absence there won't hurt you?
Reporter | ||
Comment 6•9 years ago
|
||
Thanks guys for swift reaction!
Comment 7•9 years ago
|
||
Comment 8•9 years ago
|
||
I missed this on Friday; we did an rc3 but i don't think this is in it.
tracking-firefox46:
--- → +
Comment 9•9 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Liz Henry (:lizzard) (needinfo? me) from comment #8)
> I missed this on Friday; we did an rc3 but i don't think this is in it.
It's not, fwiw.
Comment 10•9 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Nicolas B. Pierron [:nbp] from comment #1)
> This is a problem in the backported patch, which lacks definition of the
> branch64 function in the none macro assembler. I will make a patch in a few
> minutes.
It doesn't look like the none macro assembler has a branch64 method in any branch (except esr45, now)
Updated•9 years ago
|
Flags: needinfo?(nicolas.b.pierron)
Assignee | ||
Comment 11•9 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Mike Hommey [:glandium] from comment #10)
> It doesn't look like the none macro assembler has a branch64 method in any
> branch (except esr45, now)
Yes, this issue is caused by the backported patches from Bug 1246061. Newer branches are using the generic MacroAssembler, with the "PER_ARCH" macro which replaces the need for the none macro assembler.
The status flags are correct.
Flags: needinfo?(nicolas.b.pierron)
Comment 12•9 years ago
|
||
Do we need this on 46.0.1 desktop (planned for this coming week)
Or are you aiming it at the next esr?
Flags: needinfo?(nicolas.b.pierron)
Comment 13•9 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Liz Henry (:lizzard) (needinfo? me) from comment #12)
> Do we need this on 46.0.1 desktop (planned for this coming week)
> Or are you aiming it at the next esr?
It would be nice if it were fixed in both next esr and next point release. (is there a planned esr along 46.0.1?)
Assignee | ||
Comment 14•9 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Liz Henry (:lizzard) (needinfo? me) from comment #12)
> Do we need this on 46.0.1 desktop (planned for this coming week)
> Or are you aiming it at the next esr?
As Sylvestre mention, this is a nice to have but not enough to make a new release on its own.
So, yes, we should take it.
Flags: needinfo?(nicolas.b.pierron)
Comment 15•9 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8743851 [details] [diff] [review]
Add branch64 functions to the none-backend MacroAssembler.
Approved for m-r uplift so it will go into 46.0.1. Otherwise debian/redhat users can't build firefox
Attachment #8743851 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-release? → approval-mozilla-release+
Comment 17•8 years ago
|
||
Fixed by landing on the release and esr branches.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 8 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•