Thanks again Serguei.
David
On 15/11/2019 12:14 pm, [email protected] wrote:
Hi David,
Thank you for the update!
It looks good to me.
You are right about my first suggestion.
The lines need to stay where they are, or additional curly brackets
are needed to force the ThreadBlockInVM destructor earlier.
Thanks,
Serguei
On 11/14/19 2:21 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Serguei,
Thanks for taking a look.
On 15/11/2019 4:04 am, [email protected] wrote:
Hi David,
It looks good to me.
A couple of nits below.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8233549/webrev/src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmtiRawMonitor.cpp.frames.html
236 if (self->is_Java_thread()) {
237 JavaThread* jt = (JavaThread*) self;
238 // Transition to VM so we can check interrupt state
239 ThreadInVMfromNative tivm(jt);
240 if (jt->is_interrupted(true)) {
241 ret = M_INTERRUPTED;
242 } else {
243 ThreadBlockInVM tbivm(jt);
244 jt->set_suspend_equivalent();
245 if (millis <= 0) {
246 self->_ParkEvent->park();
247 } else {
248 self->_ParkEvent->park(millis);
249 }
250 }
251 // Return to VM before post-check of interrupt state
252 if (jt->is_interrupted(true)) {
253 ret = M_INTERRUPTED;
254 }
255 } else {
It seems, the fragment at lines 251-254 needs to bebefore the line 250.
It will add more clarity to this code.
No, it has to be after line 250 as that is when we will hit the TBIVM
destructor and so return to _thread_in_vm which is the state needed to
read the interrupted field. Dan commented on the above and I changed
it slightly by moving the comment:
> 250 // Return to VM before post-check of interrupt state
> 251 }
> 252 if (jt->is_interrupted(true)) {
> 253 ret = M_INTERRUPTED;
> 254 }
412 if (self->is_Java_thread()) {
413 JavaThread* jt = (JavaThread*)self;
414 jt->set_suspend_equivalent();
415 for (;;) {
416 if (!jt->handle_special_suspend_equivalent_condition()) {
417 break;
418 } else {
419 // We've been suspended whilst waiting and so we have to
420 // relinquish the raw monitor until we are resumed. Of course
421 // after reacquiring we have to re-check for suspension again.
422 // Suspension requires we are _thread_blocked, and we also have to
423 // recheck for being interrupted.
424 simple_exit(jt);
425 {
426 ThreadInVMfromNative tivm(jt);
427 {
428 ThreadBlockInVM tbivm(jt);
429 jt->java_suspend_self();
430 }
431 if (jt->is_interrupted(true)) {
432 ret = M_INTERRUPTED;
433 }
434 }
435 simple_enter(jt);
436 jt->set_suspend_equivalent();
437 }
...
This code can be simplified a little bit.
The line:
414 jt->set_suspend_equivalent();
can be placed before line 416.
Then this line can be removed:
436 jt->set_suspend_equivalent();
Yes you're right. I was trying to preserve the original loop
structure, but then had to add the additional set_suspend_equivalent
for the first iteration. But I can instead just move the existing one
to the top of the loop.
Webrev updated in place.
Thanks,
David
-----
Thanks,
Serguei
On 11/11/19 20:52, David Holmes wrote:
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8233549/webrev/
bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8233549
In JDK-8229516 I moved the interrupted state of a thread from the
osThread in the VM to the java.lang.Thread instance. In doing that I
overlooked a critical aspect, which is that to access the field of a
Java object the JavaThread must not be in a safepoint-safe state** -
otherwise the oop, and anything referenced there from could be
relocated by the GC whilst the JavaThread is accessing it. This
manifested in a number of tests using JVM TI Agent threads and JVM
TI RawMonitors because the JavaThread's were marked _thread_blocked
and hence safepoint-safe, and we read a non-zero value for the
interrupted field even though we had never been interrupted.
This problem existed in all the code that checks for interruption
when "waiting":
- Parker::park (the code underpinning
java.util.concurrent.LockSupport.park())
To fix this code I simply deleted a late check of the interrupted
field. The check was not needed because if an interrupt has occurred
then we will find the ParkEvent in a signalled state.
- ObjectMonitor::wait
Here the late check of the interrupted state is essential as we
reset the ParkEvent after an earlier check of the interrupted state.
But the fix was simply achieved by moving the check slightly earlier
before we use ThreadBlockInVm to become _thread_blocked.
- RawMonitor::wait
This fix was much more involved. The RawMonitor code directly
transitions the JavaThread from _thread_in_Native to
_thread_blocked. This is safe from a safepoint perspective because
they are equivalent safepoint-safe states. To allow access to the
interrupted field I have to transition from native to _thread_in_vm,
and that has to be done by proper thread-state transitions to ensure
correct access to the oop and its fields. Having done that I can
then use ThreadBlockInVM for the transitions to blocked. However, as
the old code noted it can't use proper thread-state transitions as
this will lead to deadlocks with the VMThread that can also use
RawMonitors when executing various event callbacks. To deal with
that we have to note that the real constraint is that the JavaThread
cannot block at a safepoint whilst it holds the RawMonitor. Hence
the fix was push all the interrupt checking code and the
thread-state transitions to the lowest level of RawMonitorWait,
around the final park() call, after we have enqueued the waiter and
released the monitor. That avoids any deadlock possibility.
I also added checks to is_interrupted/interrupted to ensure they are
only called by a thread in a suitable state. This should only be the
VMThread (as a consequence of the Thread.stop implementation
occurring at a safepoint and issuing a JavaThread::interrupt() call
to unblock the target); or a JavaThread that is not
_thread_in_native or _thread_blocked.
Testing: (still finalizing)
- tiers 1 - 6 (Oracle platforms)
- Local Linux testing
- vmTestbase/nsk/monitoring/
- vmTestbase/nsk/jdwp
- vmTestbase/nsk/jdb/
- vmTestbase/nsk/jdi/
- vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/
- serviceability/jvmti/
- serviceability/jdwp
- JDK: java/lang/management
com/sun/management
** Note that this applies to all accesses we make via code in
javaClasses.*. For this particular code I thought about adding a
guard in JavaThread::threadObj() but it turns out when we generate a
crash report we access the Thread's name() field and that can happen
when in any state, so we'd always trigger a secondary assertion
failure during error reporting if we did that. Note that accessing
name() can still easily lead to secondary assertions failures as I
discovered when trying to debug this and print the thread name out -
I would see an is_instance assertion fail checking that the Thread
name() is an instance of java.lang.String!
Thanks,
David
-----
