Closed
Bug 822171
Opened 12 years ago
Closed 12 years ago
"Assertion failure: !global->nativeLookupNoAllocation(id),"
Categories
(Core :: JavaScript Engine, defect)
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
DUPLICATE
of bug 824217
People
(Reporter: gkw, Unassigned)
References
Details
(Keywords: assertion, regression, testcase, Whiteboard: [jsbugmon:update,ignore])
Attachments
(1 file)
8.81 KB,
text/plain
|
Details |
x = evalcx('lazy')
x.Int16Array = Int16Array
uneval(x)
asserts js debug shell on m-c changeset c8a1314aa449 without any CLI arguments at Assertion failure: !global->nativeLookupNoAllocation(id),
See bug 799898, which has a testcase that seems a little different.
![]() |
Reporter | |
Comment 1•12 years ago
|
||
autoBisect shows this is probably related to the following changeset:
The first bad revision is:
changeset: 107534:adab1fdcfe0a
user: Luke Wagner
date: Tue Sep 04 14:31:04 2012 -0700
summary: Bug 786801 - js_InferFlags should not stop at compartment boundaries (r=bhackett)
Luke, is this a possible regressor?
Blocks: 786801
Flags: needinfo?(luke)
Comment 2•12 years ago
|
||
See also bug 799898, likely a dup of that. However, if it's the same issue, the test confirms that the issue isn't E4X only.
![]() |
Reporter | |
Comment 3•12 years ago
|
||
Yes, that was mentioned in comment 0, adding to "See Also" for good measure.
See Also: → 799898
![]() |
||
Comment 4•12 years ago
|
||
I think this is just a bug in sandbox_resolve (and thus shell-only) that was exposed by bug 786801 fixing brokenness:
In comment 0 we overwrite Int16Array but fail to js_InitTypedArrayClasses which means that we add a regular property "Int16Array". Thus, when we *do* js_InitTypedArrayClasses later, we hit the assert that we haven't already defined the property we are about to initialize.
Why do we fail to js_InitTypedArrayClasses? Because sandbox_resolve doesn't JS_ResolveStandardClases if JSRESOLVE_ASSIGNING which is set for the cross-compartment JSOP_SETPROP in the first line of comment 0 (which, before bug 786801 would have incorrectly been !JSRESOLVE_ASSIGNING).
Waldo: should we just remove the JSRESOLVE_ASSIGNING test in sandbox_resolve?
Flags: needinfo?(luke) → needinfo?(jwalden+bmo)
Comment 5•12 years ago
|
||
Yes. We need to remove JSRESOLVE_ASSIGNING anyway to get rid of resolve flags. (And even current uses of it are broken in any case, see bug 547140.)
Flags: needinfo?(jwalden+bmo)
Updated•12 years ago
|
Whiteboard: [jsbugmon:update] → [jsbugmon:update,ignore]
Comment 6•12 years ago
|
||
JSBugMon: The testcase found in this bug no longer reproduces (tried revision 4e18ac9b51e2).
![]() |
Reporter | |
Updated•12 years ago
|
Whiteboard: [jsbugmon:update,ignore] → [jsbugmon:update,bisectfix]
Updated•12 years ago
|
Whiteboard: [jsbugmon:update,bisectfix] → [jsbugmon:update,ignore]
Comment 7•12 years ago
|
||
JSBugMon: The testcase found in this bug no longer reproduces (tried revision 4e18ac9b51e2).
JSBugMon: Fix Bisection requested, result:
autoBisect shows this is probably related to the following changeset:
The first good revision is:
changeset: 117329:0ce29ce2ea7c
user: Jeff Walden
date: Wed Dec 19 19:32:34 2012 -0500
summary: Bug 824217 - Remove some easy-to-remove tests of JSRESOLVE_ASSIGNING. r=bz
This iteration took 0.379 seconds to run.
Updated•12 years ago
|
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 12 years ago
Resolution: --- → DUPLICATE
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•