Hi Lin,

On 28/02/2019 4:49 pm, 臧琳 wrote:
Hi David,
     Your are right and thanks for pointing it out. when I worte that patch, I 
was considering implement -filename and -incremental together. and I must be 
too stupid to forget recover it when I divided the patch into two.
     And it seems a good solution is to refine the original patch of jmap 
histo, and try to composite all args as one when passing it to socket and let 
attachlistener to handle the analyze.
    I will try that.
    One more, do I need to consider changing the jmap -dump also?

I'm assuming -dump already works fine, so I'm just expecting to see -histo handle the file in a similar manner.

If you find this works I suggest creating a sub-task of 8215622 to first backout the original changes (hg backout), and a second sub-task to REDO with the new implementation. Each will need reviewing separately in their own RFR thread.

Thanks,
David

BRs,
Lin
________________________________________
From: David Holmes <david.hol...@oracle.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2019 12:59:28 PM
To: 臧琳; Yasumasa Suenaga
Cc: serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net
Subject: Re: Protocol version of Attach API

Sorry I'm going to pick up on the rollback and re-do option here as I
just had a closer look at jmap. Given jmap -dump already has more
options than -histo does, why was any change to the "maximum number of
args" needed in the first place ???

David

On 28/02/2019 2:43 pm, David Holmes wrote:
Hi everyone,

I'm not sure we're converging on a suitable solution here, but to
address the issues flagged by Lin below ...

On 28/02/2019 12:39 pm, 臧琳 wrote:
Hi Suenaga,

       Thanks for your expaination about  the arg_length_max, I
generally agree with you that it is better to consider using dynamic
memory, and that would be handled carefully to aviod introduce
compatibility issue, plus it would be a big change. So let’s see what
others suggest.

Hi All,

It seems for me that there are basically three problems forked by this
thread:

·Compatibility issue with old jcmd alike tools with attachListener’s
change.

This is issue:

https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8219721

·Only 3 arguments limited to passed by socket to attachListener for
Windows, which cause 8215622 work abnormally on Windows.

I have filed a new bug for this:

https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8219895

·The arg_length_max may not be enough for handling filename.

I have filed a new bug for this:

https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8219896

though it seems very related to this issue.

So I suggest we keep the first problem discussed in this thread, and
create separate thread for the others. Do you agree?

There is some overlap but yes this can be broken down somewhat - though
dealing with the variable length "packet" is going to have to consider
that what is received is in fact much larger than the purported maximum
packet size if these long paths are expected and accepted.

FWIW I don't see crashes or anything drastic if the arguments are too
long - the operations just fail (in somewhat obscure ways sometimes).


For me, I will refine my patch to use timeout as a fix for the first
one, and update it in this thread. And I will try to fix the second
one for Windows, and create a separate thread for discussing. And if
possible, I can help to fix the third one.

What’s your opinion?

That sounds fine ...

Or you could choose to rollback JDK-8215622 and see how to solve that
without increasing the arg count. Given this usage:

jmap -histo:live,file=foo.txt <pid>

I'm not sure why this is sent to the VM as multiple args rather than as
a single composite arg that can then be parsed again by the actual
"jmap" logic. There would be some double-up perhaps if the front-end
tool wants to perform the command-line validation, but it would be easy
enough I think to do that checking then send the original composite arg.

Thanks,
David
-----


BRs,

Lin

*From:*Yasumasa Suenaga <yasue...@gmail.com>
*Sent:* Thursday, February 28, 2019 8:39 AM
*To:* 臧琳<zangl...@jd.com>
*Cc:* David Holmes <david.hol...@oracle.com>;
serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net
serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net <serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net>
*Subject:* Re: Protocol version of Attach API

2019年2月28日(木) 0:04 臧琳 <zangl...@jd.com <mailto:zangl...@jd.com>>:

     Dear Suenaga,
            Thanks for your reviewing. I will try to refine the patch.
            For the argument length you mentioned, do you mean the
     "arg_length_max" should be large enough to accept the max filename
     length?

Yes, but it is not enough.

For example, jcmd VM.log might pass 2 or more paths to define logs.

            IMHO, all the handling of the argument length is at receiver
     side in the attachListener, such as

http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/jdk/file/df3d253aaf81/src/hotspot/os/linux/attachListener_linux.cpp#l322,
     for me it means that the VM side limits the argments length less
     than arg_length_max, otherwise it will return NULL, which cause the
     sender side (tools like jcmd and jmap) exits with error message. so
     I think there may be no need to limit the argument size in tool side.

IMHO all programs which use filesystem should support any locations on
it.

So I think we should use dynamic memory (or GrowableArray) for it if
we do not change client side for compatibility.

            And from my experiment with jmap, the arguments send to
     sockets are not arg0 only.  as you can see in

http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/jdk/file/df3d253aaf81/src/jdk.jcmd/share/classes/sun/tools/jmap/JMap.java#l193

     and

http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/jdk/file/df3d253aaf81/src/jdk.jcmd/share/classes/sun/tools/jmap/JMap.java#l133,

     jmap can pass arg0 as "filename", and arg1 as "-live", and both of
     them can be NULL. so <ver>0<cmd>0<arg>0<arg>0<arg>0  can be
     <ver>0<jmap>0<filename>0<live>0, and file can be null. so 00 may not
     indicate it reach the end.

We should consider for other tools - jstack and jinfo.

(jstack is ok because it will not have long arguments)

Thanks,

Yasumasa


     BRs,
     Lin
     ________________________________________
     From: Yasumasa Suenaga <yasue...@gmail.com
<mailto:yasue...@gmail.com>>
     Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 8:10:14 PM
     To: 臧琳
     Cc: David Holmes; serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net
     <mailto:serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net>
     Subject: Re: Protocol version of Attach API

     Hi Lin,

     I think we need to research more about this.
     IMHO we need to match length of arguments between
     server (AttachListener) and client (serviceability tools) at least.
     (please see previous email from me).

     I have some comments for your change:

     On 2019/02/27 18:22, 臧琳 wrote:
      > Dear All,
      >      Here I have figured out one solution based on timeout. would
     you like help to see whether this is OK?
      > --- a/src/hotspot/os/linux/attachListener_linux.cpp     Tue Feb
     26 14:57:23 2019 +0530
      > +++ b/src/hotspot/os/linux/attachListener_linux.cpp     Wed Feb
     27 17:21:48 2019 +0800
      > @@ -263,9 +263,29 @@
      >     int off = 0;
      >     int left = max_len;
      >
      > +  memset(buf, 0, max_len);
      > +  // set timeout for read
      > +  struct timeval timeout;
      > +  timeout.tv_sec = 3;
      > +  timeout.tv_usec = 0;

     I think timeout value should be configurable.
     For example, we can introduce new flag in globals.hpp .


      > +  if(setsockopt(s, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVTIMEO, (struct
     timeval*)&timeout, sizeof(timeout))) {
      > +    log_debug(attach)("Failed to set socket option SO_RCVTIMEO:
     %s\n", strerror(errorno));
      > +    printf("Warning: Failed to set socket option SO_RCVTIMEO:
     %s!!!\n", strerror(errno));

     You should not use printf(), and do you need to pass '\n' to
     log_debug()?


      > +  }
      >     do {
      >       int n;
      > -    RESTARTABLE(read(s, buf+off, left), n);
      > +    log_debug(attach)("start reading data from socket....\n");
      > +    n = read(s, buf+off, left);

     You should use RESTARTABLE macro.
     read(2) might be interrupted by signal.


      > +    if (n < 0) {
      > +       if (errno == EWOULDBLOCK) {

     According to man page, read(2) sets EWOULDBLOCK or EAGAIN.
     So you should check both errno.


      > +         for (int i = str_count; i < expected_str_count; i++) {
      > +           //timeout, fill reminded arguments with \0;
      > +           buf[off+i] = '\0';
      > +           str_count++;
      > +         }

     You set zero to buf[] in above.
     So you can remove this loop, and set str_count to expected_str_count
     without manipulating buf[].

     In addition, I prefer to add log_debug() at this
     to record NULL arguments are added.


      > +         break;;
      > +       }
      > +    }
      >       assert(n <= left, "buffer was too small, impossible!");
      >       buf[max_len - 1] = '\0';
      >       if (n == -1) {


     Thanks,

     Yasumasa


      > Thanks.
      > Lin
      >
      > ________________________________________
      > From: Yasumasa Suenaga <yasue...@gmail.com
     <mailto:yasue...@gmail.com>>
      > Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 15:15
      > To: David Holmes; 臧琳
      > Cc: serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net
     <mailto:serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net>
      > Subject: Re: Protocol version of Attach API
      >
      > On 2019/02/27 15:59, David Holmes wrote:
      >> On 27/02/2019 4:10 pm, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote:
      >>> Hi,
      >>>
      >>> Buffer size for receiving packets from client is determined
at [1].
      >>
      >> Maximum buffer size, yes.
      >>
      >>> It defines length of command name and of argument.
      >>> It is passed via Unix domain, so we fill '\0' to remaining
     bytes and
      >>> might be able to assume all arguments are passed with empty
string.
      >>
      >> Not sure what you mean.
      >>
      >> // The buffer is expected to be formatted as follows:
      >> // <ver>0<cmd>0<arg>0<arg>0<arg>0
      >>
      >> so we can expect to read at least two things - the ver and cmd.
     If we encounter 00 we can infer we reached the end. But we may not
     have read the full data into the buffer, so can't tell if another
     call to read() is needed yet - you only know after you've read the
00.
      >>
      >>> BTW length of arguments is defined to 1024 in [2].
      >>> jcmd and jmap might pas file path - it might be JVM_MAXPATHLEN
     (4097 bytes).
      >>> Buffer size which is used in AttachListener seems not to be
enough.
      >>
      >> One has to assume/hope that the code sending the data is working
     to the same protocol rules as the receiver! Otherwise this is just
     completely broken.
      >
      > On Linux, client (VirtualMachineImpl) seems not to check length
     of arguments:
      >

http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/jdk/file/df3d253aaf81/src/jdk.attach/linux/classes/sun/tools/attach/VirtualMachineImpl.java#l168

      >
      > In case of jcmd, all options are passed to arg #1. It seems not
     to check the length:
      >

http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/jdk/file/df3d253aaf81/src/jdk.jcmd/share/classes/sun/tools/jcmd/JCmd.java#l111

      >
      >
      > I guess other tools (jstack, jmap, etc) which connect to
     AttachListener are same.
      > So we can fix both Attach API and AttachListener (it will be big
     change!),
      > but I concern we can keep protocol version...
      >
      >
      > Thanks,
      >
      > Yasumasa
      >
      >
      >> David
      >> -----
      >>
      >>> We might have to change more.
      >>>
      >>>
      >>> Thanks,
      >>>
      >>> Yasumasa
      >>>
      >>>
      >>> [1]

http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/jdk/file/df3d253aaf81/src/hotspot/os/linux/attachListener_linux.cpp#l254

      >>> [2]

http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/jdk/file/df3d253aaf81/src/hotspot/share/services/attachListener.hpp#l106

      >>>
      >>>
      >>> On 2019/02/27 15:00, 臧琳 wrote:
      >>>> Another solution I can figure out is try to add timeout for
     socket read. I will also investigate whether is works.
      >>>>
      >>>> Cheers,
      >>>> Lin
      >>>>
      >>>>
      >>>>> -----Original Message-----
      >>>>> From: 臧琳
      >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 1:52 PM
      >>>>> To: 'David Holmes' <david.hol...@oracle.com
     <mailto:david.hol...@oracle.com>>; Yasumasa Suenaga
      >>>>> <yasue...@gmail.com <mailto:yasue...@gmail.com>>
      >>>>> Cc: serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net
     <mailto:serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net>
      >>>>> Subject: RE: Protocol version of Attach API
      >>>>>
      >>>>> Dear David, Yasumasa,
      >>>>>         I think it is hard to know how long the buffer is
     passed from socket
      >>>>> without changing the info of the message from the receiver
side.
      >>>>>         So how about when str_count reach to 3, we test it
     with non_blocking
      >>>>> read?
      >>>>>
      >>>>>
      >>>>> Cheers,
      >>>>> Lin
      >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
      >>>>>> From: David Holmes <david.hol...@oracle.com
     <mailto:david.hol...@oracle.com>>
      >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 1:44 PM
      >>>>>> To: Yasumasa Suenaga <yasue...@gmail.com
     <mailto:yasue...@gmail.com>>; 臧琳 <zangl...@jd.com
     <mailto:zangl...@jd.com>>
      >>>>>> Cc: serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net
     <mailto:serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net>
      >>>>>> Subject: Re: Protocol version of Attach API
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>> Hi Yasumasa,
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>> On 27/02/2019 1:05 pm, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote:
      >>>>>>> Hi Lin,
      >>>>>>>
      >>>>>>> My proposal is a just idea, so you need to tweak it.
      >>>>>>>
      >>>>>>> AttachListener receives raw command.
      >>>>>>> For example, jcmd is `jcmd\0<arg strings>`. Please see
      >>>>>>> HotSpotVirtualMachine and extended classes.
      >>>>>>>
      >>>>>>> In case of jcmd, I guess AttachListener will receive message
      >>>>>>> `<version>\0jcmd\0<args>\0\0\0` (I did not check it well).
      >>>>>>> So I guess we can add '\0' when `str_count` does not reach
     to maximum.
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>> I don't see how this approach can work. You have to know how
     many
      >>>>>> arguments are coming in the "packet", but that information
     is not
      >>>>>> available in the current Linux implementation.Without it you
     can't
      >>>>>> know when to stop calling read().
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>> The protocol would need to be changed to send the "packet"
     size, but
      >>>>>> that's not compatible with older JDKs.
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>> Otherwise I think we have no choice but to use a
     non-blocking read ...
      >>>>>> though I'm still unsure if you can know for certain that
you've
      >>>>>> reached the end of the "packet" ...
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>> Thanks,
      >>>>>> David
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>>>
      >>>>>>> Thanks,
      >>>>>>>
      >>>>>>> Yasumasa
      >>>>>>>
      >>>>>>>
      >>>>>>> On 2019/02/27 11:50, zangl...@jd.com
     <mailto:zangl...@jd.com> wrote:
      >>>>>>>> Dear  Yasumasa,
      >>>>>>>>     The fix you mentioned seems not work as expected.
      >>>>>>>>     I have done an experiment that use jdk1.8's "jcmd
     <pid> help" to
      >>>>>>>> attach to latest jdk.
      >>>>>>>>     it seem the whole "jcmd <pid> help"  buffer is not
      >>>>>>>>     read completely at one time. in my case it is "jcmd",
     "<pid>",
      >>>>>>>> "help", and then block at while().
      >>>>>>>>     After applied your change, it seems only the "jcmd" is
      >>>>>>>> processed, the "<pid>", "help" is replaced by '\0'.
      >>>>>>>>
      >>>>>>>> BRs,
      >>>>>>>> Lin
      >>>>>>>>

Reply via email to