Closed
Bug 850061
Opened 11 years ago
Closed 11 years ago
"Assertion failure: !IsPoisonedPtr(wrapped.wrapped)," with --enable-root-analysis, --enable-more-deterministic and gczeal(6)
Categories
(Core :: JavaScript Engine, defect)
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
WORKSFORME
People
(Reporter: gkw, Unassigned)
References
Details
(Keywords: assertion, regression, testcase)
Attachments
(1 file)
11.17 KB,
text/plain
|
Details |
gczeal(6) evalcx("RegExp(\"(?!7|(l)?)\")")() asserts js debug shell (compiled with --enable-root-analysis) on m-c changeset e6215e0357fa without any CLI arguments at Assertion failure: !IsPoisonedPtr(wrapped.wrapped),
Reporter | ||
Comment 1•11 years ago
|
||
--enable-more-deterministic builds seem to be needed here.
Summary: "Assertion failure: !IsPoisonedPtr(wrapped.wrapped)," with --enable-root-analysis and gczeal(6) → "Assertion failure: !IsPoisonedPtr(wrapped.wrapped)," with --enable-root-analysis, --enable-more-deterministic and gczeal(6)
Reporter | ||
Comment 2•11 years ago
|
||
autoBisect shows this is probably related to the following changeset: The first bad revision is: changeset: 124127:05113da6e613 user: Jon Coppeard date: Wed Mar 06 18:10:22 2013 +0000 summary: Bug 848449 - GC: Remove AutoAssertNoGC and AssertCanGC - Remove use of AutoAssertNoGC r=terrence
Blocks: 848449
Reporter | ||
Comment 3•11 years ago
|
||
autoBisect shows this is probably related to the following changeset: The first good revision is: changeset: http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/89a645d498e3 user: Jan de Mooij date: Mon May 13 16:47:57 2013 -0700 summary: Bug 857845 part 1 - rm JaegerMonkey. r=bhackett, sr=luke This assert went away with JM, apparently. Terrence/Jan, does this seem likely?
Flags: needinfo?(terrence)
Flags: needinfo?(jdemooij)
Comment 4•11 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Gary Kwong [:gkw] [:nth10sd] from comment #3) > This assert went away with JM, apparently. Terrence/Jan, does this seem > likely? Hm, looking at the testcase in comment 0, JM shouldn't compile anything there (without -a) so it seems unlikely. Bug 857845 part 1 also touched non-JM code, but my guess is that removing all that code somehow changed GC or allocation behavior so that this no longer repros.
Flags: needinfo?(jdemooij)
Reporter | ||
Comment 5•11 years ago
|
||
Let's resolve this WFM then - I'm sure another bug will be filed should this show up again.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 11 years ago
Flags: needinfo?(terrence) → in-testsuite?
Resolution: --- → WORKSFORME
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•