Possible bug in nmethod reloc verification/scanning in G1

Christos Kotselidis christos.kotselidis at oracle.com
Thu Nov 21 11:40:11 UTC 2013


Hi,

I came across the following scenario, I already discussed with Thomas
Schatzl, that I would like to share with you.
There is a method:


private static final HotSpotGraalRuntime instance = new
HotSpotGraalRuntime();

    

public static HotSpotGraalRuntime runtime() {

        return instance;

}

The instance field is a constant oop in the code and the method is
installed.
At some stage there is a GC with post verification (including
G1VerifyHeapRegionCodeRoots) that passes.
Before the next GC cycle and during the mutation cycle, another method is
being installed which causes the eviction of our method. Consequently our
method is being made not_entrant and it is being patched with a jmp
instruction
at its verified entry point (nmethod.cpp::make_not_entrant_or_zombie). The
patching causes the oop to be overwritten by the jmp instruction.
Furthemore, that oop was the only oop that was responsible for
attaching this method to its correspondent HeapRegion.

The next GC cycle (Pre-verification) comes and the HeapRegionCodeRoot
verification starts (nmethod.cpp::oops_do). There is a logic there (which I
also believe it may be buggy as I will explain later) that checks whether
the method is not_entrant. If the method is not_entrant then the logic
correctly assumes that the method has been already been patched and
therefore starts scanning the relocs of the method in +5 bytes (for x86)/+4
bytes (for SPARC) (as the comment states). This results in not scanning the
single oop that was attaching this specific method to its heap region. The
verification then correctly asserts by saying that "there is a method
attached to this specific heap region with no oops pointing into it".

Concerning the second bug in the method::oops_do logic, here is the code for
manipulating the reloc starting address after a method has been patched:

// If the method is not entrant or zombie then a JMP is plastered over the

  // first few bytes.  If an oop in the old code was there, that oop

  // should not get GC'd.  Skip the first few bytes of oops on

  // not-entrant methods.

  address low_boundary = verified_entry_point();

  if (is_not_entrant()) {

    low_boundary += NativeJump::instruction_size;

    // %%% Note:  On SPARC we patch only a 4-byte trap, not a full
NativeJump.

    // (See comment above.)

  }



The code above accounts only for the "is not entrant" scenario and not with
the "is zombie" scenario.



I hope I got the story rightŠwhat do you think?



Thank you in advance



Regards



Christos






-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/attachments/20131121/198fd849/attachment.htm>


More information about the hotspot-gc-dev mailing list