Closed Bug 582910 Opened 14 years ago Closed 14 years ago

64-bit win7: TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | e4x/Regress/regress-347155.js | Exited with code -1073741571 during test run

Categories

(Core :: JavaScript Engine, defect)

x86_64
Windows Vista
defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

()

RESOLVED FIXED
mozilla2.0b4

People

(Reporter: m_kato, Assigned: m_kato)

References

Details

Attachments

(3 files)

link.exe sets default stack size is 1MB. (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/8cxs58a6.aspx)

But http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/js/src/xpconnect/src/xpcjsruntime.cpp#1227

1227     JS_SetNativeStackQuota(cx, 128 * sizeof(size_t) * 1024);

stack limit of js engine sets 128 * 8 * 1024 = 1MB (32bit version is 512KB)

So e4x/Regress/regress-347155.js causes stack overflow.
Summary: TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | e4x/Regress/regress-347155.js | Exited with code -1073 741571 during test run → 64-bit win7: TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | e4x/Regress/regress-347155.js | Exited with code -1073 741571 during test run
Attached patch fixSplinter Review
Assignee: general → m_kato
Attachment #461446 - Flags: review?(dolske)
Summary: 64-bit win7: TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | e4x/Regress/regress-347155.js | Exited with code -1073 741571 during test run → 64-bit win7: TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | e4x/Regress/regress-347155.js | Exited with code -1073741571 during test run
Do you also expect this to fix this crashtest failure, or should a separate bug be filed on it:

http://tinderbox.mozilla.org/showlog.cgi?log=Firefox/1280581006.1280581431.31618.gz
Rev3 WINNT 6.1 x64 mozilla-central opt test crashtest on 2010/07/31 05:56:46
TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | file:///C:/talos-slave/mozilla-central-w764-opt-u-crashtest/build/reftest/tests/content/events/crashtests/recursive-DOMNodeInserted.html | Exited with code -1073741571 during test run

http://tinderbox.mozilla.org/showlog.cgi?log=Firefox/1280502954.1280503374.5513.gz
Rev3 WINNT 6.1 x64 mozilla-central opt test crashtest on 2010/07/30 08:15:54
TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | file:///C:/talos-slave/mozilla-central-w764-opt-u-crashtest/build/reftest/tests/content/events/crashtests/recursive-DOMNodeInserted.html | Exited with code -1073741571 during test run
(Actually, I'm reasonably confident it will also fix it.  And probably also the editor test crash in mochitest-plain-3/5, which also looks like it could recurse deeply.)
Was this a regression from http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/b9f320e24e04 , or has it been a problem since we started running the Win64 tests?
(In reply to comment #4)
> Was this a regression from
> http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/b9f320e24e04 , or has it been a
> problem since we started running the Win64 tests?

I believe that this is from changing compiler to VC++9. But, also, this problem has on VC++10 since stack size is unchanged.

(In reply to comment #2)
> Do you also expect this to fix this crashtest failure, or should a separate bug
> be filed on it:
> 
> http://tinderbox.mozilla.org/showlog.cgi?log=Firefox/1280581006.1280581431.31618.gz
> Rev3 WINNT 6.1 x64 mozilla-central opt test crashtest on 2010/07/31 05:56:46
> TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL |
> file:///C:/talos-slave/mozilla-central-w764-opt-u-crashtest/build/reftest/tests/content/events/crashtests/recursive-DOMNodeInserted.html
> | Exited with code -1073741571 during test run
> 
> http://tinderbox.mozilla.org/showlog.cgi?log=Firefox/1280502954.1280503374.5513.gz
> Rev3 WINNT 6.1 x64 mozilla-central opt test crashtest on 2010/07/30 08:15:54
> TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL |
> file:///C:/talos-slave/mozilla-central-w764-opt-u-crashtest/build/reftest/tests/content/events/crashtests/recursive-DOMNodeInserted.html
> | Exited with code -1073741571 during test run

I think that this is same.
Comment on attachment 461446 [details] [diff] [review]
fix

Someone more familiar with the particularities of x64 and this problem should review this. Maybe ted?
Attachment #461446 - Flags: review?(dolske) → review?(ted.mielczarek)
(Also, do Linux or OS X need a stacksize adjustment too on x86?)
Comment on attachment 461446 [details] [diff] [review]
fix

Sorry, but this really isn't my purview either. dbaron: care to review?

As an aside, I don't think you need the "see bug 582910" comment. We have blame for people to find bug numbers.
Attachment #461446 - Flags: review?(ted.mielczarek) → review?(dbaron)
Comment on attachment 461446 [details] [diff] [review]
fix

r=dbaron

Though perhaps it's better to use "/STACK" rather tan "-STACK" to be consistent with the code right above it?

(I even found the documentation for the option at
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/8cxs58a6%28v=VS.90%29.aspx .)
Attachment #461446 - Flags: review?(dbaron) → review+
(In reply to comment #9)
> Comment on attachment 461446 [details] [diff] [review]
> fix
> 
> r=dbaron
> 
> Though perhaps it's better to use "/STACK" rather tan "-STACK" to be consistent
> with the code right above it?
> 
> (I even found the documentation for the option at
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/8cxs58a6%28v=VS.90%29.aspx .)

It works either '-' or '/'.  Most linker parameters that we uses are '-'

link -NOLOGO -DLL -OUT:xul.dll -PDB:xul.pdb -SUBSYSTEM:WINDOWS  dlldeps-xul.obj
nsStaticXULComponents.obj nsDllMain.obj dlldeps.obj nsGFXDeps.obj dlldeps-zlib.o
bj nsUnicharUtils.obj nsBidiUtils.obj nsRDFResource.obj    ./module.res -NXCOMPA
T -DYNAMICBASE -SAFESEH  -DEBUG -DEBUGTYPE:CV -MANIFEST:NO -LIBPATH:"c:/Workspac
e/hg.mozilla.org/objdir-win32-1/memory/jemalloc/crtsrc/build/intel" -NODEFAULTLI
B:msvcrt -NODEFAULTLIB:msvcrtd -NODEFAULTLIB:msvcprt -NODEFAULTLIB:msvcprtd ...
Attachment #461446 - Flags: approval2.0?
Actually, though, maybe this patch should be changing all the locations where we currently have this code:
http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/search?string=HEAP%3A0
(r=dbaron and a=dbaron stand with that change)
http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/4e8a688ab358
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 14 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla2.0b4
We may need this for xpcshell.  xpcshell test hang (timeout) is same reason (stack overflow).
Attached patch for xpcshellSplinter Review
fix xpcshell test hang (I forget xpcshell for test!)
Attachment #466923 - Flags: review?(dbaron)
Attachment #466923 - Flags: approval2.0?
Attachment #466923 - Flags: review?(dbaron)
Attachment #466923 - Flags: review+
Attachment #466923 - Flags: approval2.0?
Attachment #466923 - Flags: approval2.0+
And xpcshell tests are now green.
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Created:
Updated:
Size: