Closed
Bug 655950
Opened 15 years ago
Closed 15 years ago
TI: "Assertion failure: isObject(),"
Categories
(Core :: JavaScript Engine, defect)
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
People
(Reporter: gkw, Assigned: jandem)
References
Details
(Keywords: assertion, testcase)
Attachments
(1 file)
|
1.04 KB,
patch
|
bhackett1024
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
function f() {
try {
(new {
x: function() {}
}.x)();
} catch (e) {}
}
for (var i = 0;; i++) {
f();
}
asserts js debug shell on JM changeset 32e8c937a409 with -m, -j and -n at Assertion failure: isObject(),
(gdb) bt
#0 0xf7fdf430 in __kernel_vsyscall ()
#1 0xf7fb5ba0 in raise (sig=6) at ../nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/pt-raise.c:42
#2 0x081fdc65 in JS_Assert (s=0x83c66e4 "isObject()", file=0x83c668c "/home/fuzz1/Desktop/jsfunfuzz-dbg-32-jm-69153-32e8c937a409/compilePath/js/src/jsvalue.h", ln=619)
at /home/fuzz1/Desktop/jsfunfuzz-dbg-32-jm-69153-32e8c937a409/compilePath/js/src/jsutil.cpp:89
#3 0x0805a03b in js::Value::toObject (this=0xf76e40b0) at /home/fuzz1/Desktop/jsfunfuzz-dbg-32-jm-69153-32e8c937a409/compilePath/js/src/jsvalue.h:619
#4 0x080f24d5 in js::CallReceiver::callee (this=0xffffa568) at /home/fuzz1/Desktop/jsfunfuzz-dbg-32-jm-69153-32e8c937a409/compilePath/js/src/vm/Stack.h:171
#5 0x0812685a in js::Invoke (cx=0x84e2028, argsRef=..., option=js::INVOKE_NORMAL) at /home/fuzz1/Desktop/jsfunfuzz-dbg-32-jm-69153-32e8c937a409/compilePath/js/src/jsinterp.cpp:629
#6 0x083994fd in js::Interpret (cx=0x84e2028, entryFrame=0xf76e4078, inlineCallCount=0, interpMode=js::JSINTERP_SAFEPOINT)
at /home/fuzz1/Desktop/jsfunfuzz-dbg-32-jm-69153-32e8c937a409/compilePath/js/src/jsinterp.cpp:4746
#7 0x08353797 in js_InternalInterpret (returnData=0xf6e9c9d8, returnType=0xffff0007, returnReg=0x82b6540, f=...)
at /home/fuzz1/Desktop/jsfunfuzz-dbg-32-jm-69153-32e8c937a409/compilePath/js/src/methodjit/InvokeHelpers.cpp:1612
#8 0x082b6518 in JaegerInterpoline () at /home/fuzz1/Desktop/jsfunfuzz-dbg-32-jm-69153-32e8c937a409/compilePath/js/src/methodjit/MethodJIT.cpp:152
#9 0x000f4240 in ?? ()
#10 0x00000000 in ?? ()
Comment 1•15 years ago
|
||
Hmm, I can't repro on the given changeset in either 32 bit or 64 bit.
| Reporter | ||
Comment 2•15 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #1)
> Hmm, I can't repro on the given changeset in either 32 bit or 64 bit.
Tested on Linux 32-bit, but if it continues to be unreproducible, perhaps WFM then.
| Reporter | ||
Comment 3•15 years ago
|
||
I still can reproduce this on JM changeset fd1abc43d698 with -m, -j and -n on a 32-bit Linux shell when the testcase is passed in as a CLI argument.
| Assignee | ||
Comment 4•15 years ago
|
||
GCC on 32-bit Linux didn't like the uint64 cast. If returnData was 0xffff0007, rvalBits ended up with 0xffffffff type tag. I also swapped the operands because I think it's more readable now that we use (uint32).
This fixes the test in coment 0 and most jit-tests (one failure left).
Assignee: general → jandemooij
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Attachment #531593 -
Flags: review?(bhackett1024)
Updated•15 years ago
|
Attachment #531593 -
Flags: review?(bhackett1024) → review+
| Assignee | ||
Comment 5•15 years ago
|
||
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 15 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Comment 10•13 years ago
|
||
Automatically extracted testcase for this bug was committed:
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/efaf8960a929
Flags: in-testsuite+
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•