Uploaded image for project: 'JDK'
  1. JDK
  2. JDK-8022774

nsk/jdi/ThreadReference/forceEarlyReturn/forceEarlyReturn007 crashes - ~BufferBlob::vtable chunks

    Details

      Description

      ;; Using jvm: "/scratch/export_local/aurora/sandbox/sca/vmsqe/jdk/nightly/fastdebug/comp_baseline/linux-i586/jre/lib/i386/client/libjvm.so"
      #
      # A fatal error has been detected by the Java Runtime Environment:
      #
      # SIGSEGV (0xb) at pc=0xf4304eaf, pid=16957, tid=3944414064
      #
      # JRE version: Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (8.0-b102) (build 1.8.0-ea-fastdebug-b102)
      # Java VM: Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (25.0-b46-internal-201308091623.rbackman.main_to_comp-fastdebug compiled mode linux-x86 )
      # Problematic frame:
      # v ~BufferBlob::vtable chunks
      #
      # Core dump written. Default location: /scratch/export_local/aurora/sandbox/results/ResultDir/forceEarlyReturn007/core or core.16957
      #
      # If you would like to submit a bug report, please visit:
      # http://bugreport.sun.com/bugreport/crash.jsp
      #


      Stack: [0xeb15f000,0xeb1b0000], sp=0xeb1aeafc, free space=318k
      Native frames: (J=compiled Java code, j=interpreted, Vv=VM code, C=native code)
      v ~BufferBlob::vtable chunks
      j nsk.share.jpda.ForceEarlyReturnTestThread.run()V+82
      v ~StubRoutines::call_stub
      V [libjvm.so+0x481e67] JavaCalls::call_helper(JavaValue*, methodHandle*, JavaCallArguments*, Thread*)+0x17e7;; .L543+0x328
      V [libjvm.so+0x709ad9] os::os_exception_wrapper(void (*)(JavaValue*, methodHandle*, JavaCallArguments*, Thread*), JavaValue*, methodHandle*, JavaCallArguments*, Thread*)+0x19;; os::os_exception_wrapper(void (*)(JavaValue*, methodHandle*, JavaCallArguments*, Thread*), JavaValue*, methodHandle*, JavaCallArguments*, Thread*)+0x19
      V [libjvm.so+0x48253b] JavaCalls::call_virtual(JavaValue*, KlassHandle, Symbol*, Symbol*, JavaCallArguments*, Thread*)+0x4eb;; JavaCalls::call_virtual(JavaValue*, KlassHandle, Symbol*, Symbol*, JavaCallArguments*, Thread*)+0x4eb
      V [libjvm.so+0x482bf1] JavaCalls::call_virtual(JavaValue*, Handle, KlassHandle, Symbol*, Symbol*, Thread*)+0x61;; JavaCalls::call_virtual(JavaValue*, Handle, KlassHandle, Symbol*, Symbol*, Thread*)+0x61
      V [libjvm.so+0x542cfe] thread_entry(JavaThread*, Thread*)+0x7e;; thread_entry(JavaThread*, Thread*)+0x7e
      V [libjvm.so+0x8426b9] JavaThread::thread_main_inner()+0x1b9;; JavaThread::thread_main_inner()+0x1b9
      V [libjvm.so+0x8429c8] JavaThread::run()+0x268;; JavaThread::run()+0x268
      V [libjvm.so+0x7120f9] java_start(Thread*)+0x119;; java_start(Thread*)+0x119
      C [libpthread.so.0+0x6a49] abort@@GLIBC_2.0+0x6a49

        Issue Links

          Activity

          Hide
          sspitsyn Serguei Spitsyn added a comment -
          The sub-component of this bug must be "jvmti" instead of "svc".
          This is why this bug got out of the radar.
          The priority P2 is too high for it.
          The JVMTI ForceEarlyReturn API has a very limited usage so that P3 would be Ok.
          Changed the priority and assigned it to myself.
          Show
          sspitsyn Serguei Spitsyn added a comment - The sub-component of this bug must be "jvmti" instead of "svc". This is why this bug got out of the radar. The priority P2 is too high for it. The JVMTI ForceEarlyReturn API has a very limited usage so that P3 would be Ok. Changed the priority and assigned it to myself.
          Hide
          lmesnik Leonid Mesnik added a comment - - edited
          See this issue to find why test was excluded and start failing only now.
          https://jbs.oracle.com/bugs/browse/JDK-6449023
          Show
          lmesnik Leonid Mesnik added a comment - - edited See this issue to find why test was excluded and start failing only now. https://jbs.oracle.com/bugs/browse/JDK-6449023
          Hide
          allwin Peter Allwin (Inactive) added a comment -
          This looks like the same issue as JDK-6449023 which was recently closed as not reproducible because there were no recent failures, unfortunately this was due to the test not being run. Reopening that issue and closing this as a duplicate.
          Show
          allwin Peter Allwin (Inactive) added a comment - This looks like the same issue as JDK-6449023 which was recently closed as not reproducible because there were no recent failures, unfortunately this was due to the test not being run. Reopening that issue and closing this as a duplicate.

            People

            • Assignee:
              sspitsyn Serguei Spitsyn
              Reporter:
              rbackman Rickard Backman
            • Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              4 Start watching this issue

              Dates

              • Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved: