LeakSanitizer: [@ js::Mutex::heldMutexStack] with evalInWorker
Categories
(Core :: JavaScript Engine, defect, P2)
Tracking
()
People
(Reporter: gkw, Assigned: pbone)
References
Details
(4 keywords, Whiteboard: [jsbugmon:update])
Attachments
(2 files)
The following testcase crashes on mozilla-central revision ca1dbd076e1e (build with --enable-debug --enable-address-sanitizer, run with --fuzzing-safe --ion-offthread-compile=off --no-baseline --no-ion and the environment variables ASAN_OPTIONS=detect_leaks=1 LSAN_OPTIONS=max_leaks=1):
evalInWorker("");
Backtrace:
The 1 top leak(s):
Direct leak of 40 byte(s) in 1 object(s) allocated from:
#0 0x55f0030649f3 in __interceptor_malloc (/home/ubuntu/shell-cache/js-dbg-64-asan-linux-x86_64-ca1dbd076e1e/js-dbg-64-asan-linux-x86_64-ca1dbd076e1e+0x262c9f3)
#1 0x55f0045b7866 in js_arena_malloc(unsigned long, unsigned long) /home/ubuntu/shell-cache/js-dbg-64-asan-linux-x86_64-ca1dbd076e1e/objdir-js/dist/include/js/Utility.h:392:10
#2 0x55f0045b7866 in js_malloc(unsigned long) /home/ubuntu/shell-cache/js-dbg-64-asan-linux-x86_64-ca1dbd076e1e/objdir-js/dist/include/js/Utility.h:396
#3 0x55f0045b7866 in mozilla::Vector<js::Mutex const*, 0ul, mozilla::MallocAllocPolicy>* js_new<mozilla::Vector<js::Mutex const*, 0ul, mozilla::MallocAllocPolicy> >() /home/ubuntu/shell-cache/js-dbg-64-asan-linux-x86_64-ca1dbd076e1e/objdir-js/dist/include/js/Utility.h:545
#4 0x55f0045b7866 in js::Mutex::heldMutexStack() js/src/threading/Mutex.cpp:31
#5 0x55f0045b7cb9 in js::Mutex::lock() js/src/threading/Mutex.cpp:41:17
/snip
For detailed crash information, see attachment.
| Reporter | ||
Comment 1•6 years ago
|
||
Updated•6 years ago
|
| Reporter | ||
Comment 2•6 years ago
|
||
autobisectjs shows this is probably related to the following changeset:
The first bad revision is:
changeset: https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/138edceae4d9
user: Jason Orendorff
date: Fri Jun 07 19:42:34 2019 +0000
summary: Bug 1556119 - Fix 64-byte memory leak in evalInWorker() shell builtin. r=fitzgen
I think this is only when the previous leak got fixed, the actual leak here in comment 0 should go back further than that. However, I'm not sure how best to proceed, so setting needinfo? from Paul (who fixed the previous similar leak in bug 1562437) as a start. If not, please feel free to forward the needinfo? to the right person.
| Reporter | ||
Updated•6 years ago
|
| Assignee | ||
Updated•6 years ago
|
| Assignee | ||
Updated•6 years ago
|
| Assignee | ||
Comment 3•6 years ago
|
||
Comment 5•6 years ago
|
||
| bugherder | ||
Updated•6 years ago
|
Description
•