Closed
Bug 927801
Opened 13 years ago
Closed 13 years ago
GenerationalGC: Some jit-tests fail with InternalError: too much recursion
Categories
(Core :: JavaScript Engine, defect)
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
mozilla27
People
(Reporter: jonco, Assigned: jonco)
References
Details
Attachments
(1 file)
|
758 bytes,
patch
|
terrence
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
In browser builds, the following jitests fail on Linux 32 builds:
TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | js/src/jit-test/tests/bug793385.js | --baseline-eager --no-ti --no-fpu
TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | js/src/jit-test/tests/basic/testBug756919.js | --baseline-eager --no-ti --no-fpu
TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | js/src/jit-test/tests/basic/testBug840012.js | --baseline-eager --no-ti --no-fpu
These tests all contain a function which calls itself recursively forever and expect to fail with out of memory.
However it seems that with GGC and this set of flags (actually --no-fpu can be removed with no effect), we do not run out of memory but the recursion limit first instead.
| Assignee | ||
Comment 1•13 years ago
|
||
Just to be clear, I don't think this is a problem with GGC, but with the test setup.
I'm not sure what the best solution is. I don't think we should alter the tests as this could disturb whatever they are testing.
It's a bit hacky, but perhaps the best approach is to change the jittest harness so that we can specify that these tests should always be run with TI enabled, which will make them fail in the expected way.
Comment 2•13 years ago
|
||
The problem here is that with ggc on /all/ of the objects in the test land in the nursery and never make it to the tenured heap. We never allocate from the tenured heap and we never hit this assertion. The solution I used in bug 924986 was to make an upvar reference from the recursive function, guaranteeing that we'd need a call object per frame.
| Assignee | ||
Comment 3•13 years ago
|
||
Great, I see bug 924986 fixed two of these. Here's a patch for the first one.
Comment 4•13 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 820356 [details] [diff] [review]
bug927801-misc-jittest-failures
Review of attachment 820356 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
\o/ Thanks, Jon! Odd that this one didn't fail for me when the other two did.
Attachment #820356 -
Flags: review?(terrence) → review+
| Assignee | ||
Comment 5•13 years ago
|
||
Comment 6•13 years ago
|
||
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 13 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla27
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•