On Tue, 4 Aug 2026 18:38:33 GMT, Patricio Chilano Mateo 
<[email protected]> wrote:

>> `VerifyStackChunkFrameClosure` calls `StackChunkFrameStream::frame_size` to 
>> compute the sizes of frames stored in the `stackChunk`, but that method 
>> incorrectly uses `cb()->frame_size()` for extended compiled frames. The 
>> actual frame size has to be read from the frame metadata recorded when the 
>> frame was extended.
>> 
>> Thanks to @TobiHartmann for the small reproducer which I included in the PR. 
>> I also tested the fix running `TestVirtualThreads.java` and `Fuzz.java` with 
>> `-XX:+VerifyContinuations` which also triggered the same assert before this 
>> fix.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Patricio
>> 
>> ---------
>> - [x] I confirm that I make this contribution in accordance with the 
>> [OpenJDK Interim AI Policy](https://openjdk.org/legal/ai).
>
> Patricio Chilano Mateo has updated the pull request incrementally with three 
> additional commits since the last revision:
> 
>  - fix copyright header
>  - addd extra @test with -XX:+VerifyContinuations
>  - fix assert

Looks correct as far as I can tell. A few comments though:

- Two copyright headers should be 2026
- I suggest you add `-Xbatch` and `-XX:-TieredCompilation` to ensure that 
`recurse()` is compiled by C2.
- The s390 version of `frame::was_augmented_on_entry()` was recently (Aug 7) 
changed. It would be nice if you merged in master and updated it to the same 
level as the rest, so it doesn't fall behind.

src/hotspot/share/oops/stackChunkOop.cpp line 2:

> 1: /*
> 2:  * Copyright (c) 2021, 2025, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights 
> reserved.

2025 should be changed to 2026

src/hotspot/share/runtime/stackChunkFrameStream.inline.hpp line 2:

> 1: /*
> 2:  * Copyright (c) 2019, 2025, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights 
> reserved.

2025 should be changed to 2026

-------------

Changes requested by fbredberg (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/32178#pullrequestreview-4926859929
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/32178#discussion_r3775194606
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/32178#discussion_r3775202786

Reply via email to