RFR (S) [Graal] runtime/CommandLine/PrintTouchedMethods.java crashes with assertion "reference count underflow for symbol"

David Holmes david.holmes at oracle.com
Sun Mar 25 13:08:15 UTC 2018

Hi Ioi,

On 24/03/2018 7:38 AM, Ioi Lam wrote:
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8199793
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iklam/jdk11/8199793-PrintTouchedMethods-crash.v01/ 
> The crash is in
>      V [libjvm.so+0x16fe226] Symbol::decrement_refcount()+0xe6
>      V [libjvm.so+0x1026e0b] JVM_FindLoadedClass+0x20b
> and the log file says "Symbol: 'java/lang/invoke/LambdaForm$BMH' count -1".
> This seems to be a race condition between Symbol::decrement_refcount()
> vs Symbol::set_permanent(). The former uses an atomic increment and is 
> called by
> JVM_FindLoadedClass. The latter does a simple store of a short value of 
> -1, and is
> called only by Method::log_touched() when -XX:+LogTouchedMethods is 
> enabled.
> Apparently we have a Symbol whose refcount started with a positive value.
> While one thread is calling Symbol::decrement_refcount() and a second
> thread calls Symbol::set_permanent() at the same time, the unexpected 
> value -1
> could be returned to the first thread.
> FIX:
> I changed Method::log_touched() to use Symbol::increment_refcount instead.
> I can no longer reproduce the crash after this change.
> Also, because the behavior of Symbol::set_permanent is not well understood
> and has shown to be racy, I removed this function altogether.

So when will a Symbol now ever be "permanent"? Isn't all the code 
related to is_permanent() and PERM_REFCOUNT dead now? And the checks for 
_refcount >= 0 ?

The other way to avoid the race is to implement inc/dec using CAS 
instead of raw atomic add/sub.


> Thanks
> - Ioi

More information about the hotspot-runtime-dev mailing list