767970 - Intermittent talos crash in talos/page_load_test/v8/run-splay.html [@ js::GCMarker::processMarkStackTop(js::SliceBudget &)|js::GCMarker::drainMarkStack(js::SliceBudget &)]

Status: RESOLVED INVALID

(Core :: JavaScript Engine, defect)

Description

[Ed Morley [:emorley]]

+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #767937 +++

Slightly different stack to bug 767937, so filing separately.

Rev3 WINNT 6.1 mozilla-inbound talos v8 on 2012-06-24 05:14:10 PDT for push f84e59e1fd66

slave: talos-r3-w7-038

https://tbpl.mozilla.org/php/getParsedLog.php?id=12950128&tree=Mozilla-Inbound

{
NOISE: Cycle 7(1): loaded file:///c:/talos-slave/talos-data/talos/page_load_test/v8/run-earley-boyer.html (next: file:///c:/talos-slave/talos-data/talos/page_load_test/v8/run-regexp.html)
NOISE: RSS: Main: 86183936
NOISE: 
NOISE: Cycle 7(1): loaded file:///c:/talos-slave/talos-data/talos/page_load_test/v8/run-regexp.html (next: file:///c:/talos-slave/talos-data/talos/page_load_test/v8/run-splay.html)
NOISE: RSS: Main: 92377088
NOISE: 
NOISE: 
NOISE: __FAILbrowser non-zero return code (-1073741819)__FAIL
NOISE: Found crashdump: c:\users\cltbld\appdata\local\temp\tmp9me0-h\profile\minidumps\9c6422f9-c2d4-4eb0-864d-05a70f2933c5.dmp
Operating system: Windows NT
                  6.1.7600 
CPU: x86
     GenuineIntel family 6 model 23 stepping 10
     2 CPUs

Crash reason:  EXCEPTION_ACCESS_VIOLATION
Crash address: 0xffffffff98efee20

Thread 0 (crashed)
 0  mozjs.dll!js::GCMarker::processMarkStackTop(js::SliceBudget &) [Marking.cpp:f84e59e1fd66 : 1167 + 0x33]
    eip = 0x72e24aa0   esp = 0x0023caa4   ebp = 0x0023cad0   ebx = 0x98eb57f0
    esi = 0x40000000   edi = 0x101bbe00   eax = 0x00016afe   ecx = 0x98efee20
    edx = 0x98e00000   efl = 0x00210286
    Found by: given as instruction pointer in context
 1  mozjs.dll!js::GCMarker::drainMarkStack(js::SliceBudget &) [Marking.cpp:f84e59e1fd66 : 1226 + 0x7]
    eip = 0x72e24d60   esp = 0x0023cad8   ebp = 0x0023cae4
    Found by: call frame info
 2  mozjs.dll!IncrementalMarkSlice [jsgc.cpp:f84e59e1fd66 : 3630 + 0xe]
    eip = 0x72d5aaf8   esp = 0x0023caec   ebp = 0x0023cb10
    Found by: call frame info
 3  mozjs.dll!GCCycle [jsgc.cpp:f84e59e1fd66 : 3784 + 0x10]
    eip = 0x72d5c752   esp = 0x0023cb18   ebp = 0x0023cb40
    Found by: call frame info
 4  mozjs.dll!Collect [jsgc.cpp:f84e59e1fd66 : 3895 + 0x1a]
    eip = 0x72d5c8e0   esp = 0x0023cb48   ebp = 0x0023cb64
    Found by: call frame info
 5  mozjs.dll!js::GCSlice(JSRuntime *,js::JSGCInvocationKind,js::gcreason::Reason) [jsgc.cpp:f84e59e1fd66 : 3925 + 0x20]
    eip = 0x72d5c9a4   esp = 0x0023cb6c   ebp = 0x0023cb84
    Found by: call frame info
 6  mozjs.dll!js_HandleExecutionInterrupt(JSContext *) [jscntxt.cpp:f84e59e1fd66 : 924 + 0x20]
    eip = 0x72d40fc5   esp = 0x0023cb8c   ebp = 0x0023cb9c
    Found by: call frame info
 7  mozjs.dll!js::mjit::stubs::Interrupt(js::VMFrame &,unsigned char *) [StubCalls.cpp:f84e59e1fd66 : 776 + 0x8]
    eip = 0x72e2963c   esp = 0x0023cba4   ebp = 0x0023cbe8
    Found by: call frame info
 8  mozjs.dll!JaegerThrowpoline + 0x7
    eip = 0x72e27ef0   esp = 0x0023cbb0   ebp = 0x0023cbe8
    Found by: stack scanning
 9  0xfffe
    eip = 0x0000ffff   esp = 0x0023cbf0   ebp = 0x06db0128
    Found by: previous frame's frame pointer
10  mozjs.dll!js::mjit::EnterMethodJIT(JSContext *,js::StackFrame *,void *,JS::Value *,bool) [MethodJIT.cpp:f84e59e1fd66 : 1016 + 0x27]
    eip = 0x72e2847b   esp = 0x0023cc00   ebp = 0x06db0128
    Found by: stack scanning
11  mozjs.dll!js::mjit::JaegerShotAtSafePoint(JSContext *,void *,bool) [MethodJIT.cpp:f84e59e1fd66 : 1092 + 0x1e]
    eip = 0x72e2860c   esp = 0x0023cc24   ebp = 0x06db0128
    Found by: stack scanning
12  mozjs.dll!js::Interpret(JSContext *,js::StackFrame *,js::InterpMode) [jsinterp.cpp:f84e59e1fd66 : 1496 + 0x8]
}

Comment 1

[Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM]]

https://tbpl.mozilla.org/php/getParsedLog.php?id=12968863&tree=Mozilla-Inbound

Comment 2

[David Baron :dbaron: (⌚️UTC-5, no longer working on Mozilla)]

This bug was observed only on one or more of the six machines listed in
bug 787281 comment 11, which seem likely to have bad memory, disk, or
other hardware problem, based on the rate of failures on those machines
and the types of failures observed.

Therefore I'm marking this bug invalid, though it should be reopened if
it occurs on other (more reliable) hardware.