On Sat, 11 Oct 2025 03:24:46 GMT, Yasumasa Suenaga <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I tried to get mixed thread dump of the application which runs virtual >> threads (see [Test.java on >> JBS](https://bugs.openjdk.org/secure/attachment/116453/Test.java)) via >> `jhsdb jstack --mixed`, then I got following message: >> >> >> sun.jvm.hotspot.utilities.AssertionFailure: must have non-zero frame size >> at >> jdk.hotspot.agent/sun.jvm.hotspot.utilities.Assert.that(Assert.java:32) >> at >> jdk.hotspot.agent/sun.jvm.hotspot.runtime.x86.X86Frame.senderForCompiledFrame(X86Frame.java:374) >> at >> jdk.hotspot.agent/sun.jvm.hotspot.runtime.x86.X86Frame.sender(X86Frame.java:273) >> at >> jdk.hotspot.agent/sun.jvm.hotspot.runtime.Frame.sender(Frame.java:225) >> at >> jdk.hotspot.agent/sun.jvm.hotspot.runtime.Frame.realSender(Frame.java:230) >> at >> jdk.hotspot.agent/sun.jvm.hotspot.runtime.VFrame.sender(VFrame.java:120) >> at >> jdk.hotspot.agent/sun.jvm.hotspot.runtime.VFrame.javaSender(VFrame.java:150) >> at >> jdk.hotspot.agent/sun.jvm.hotspot.tools.PStack.initJFrameCache(PStack.java:224) >> at jdk.hotspot.agent/sun.jvm.hotspot.tools.PStack.run(PStack.java:73) >> at jdk.hotspot.agent/sun.jvm.hotspot.tools.PStack.run(PStack.java:65) >> at jdk.hotspot.agent/sun.jvm.hotspot.tools.PStack.run(PStack.java:60) >> at jdk.hotspot.agent/sun.jvm.hotspot.tools.JStack.run(JStack.java:67) >> at >> jdk.hotspot.agent/sun.jvm.hotspot.tools.Tool.startInternal(Tool.java:278) >> at jdk.hotspot.agent/sun.jvm.hotspot.tools.Tool.start(Tool.java:241) >> at >> jdk.hotspot.agent/sun.jvm.hotspot.tools.Tool.execute(Tool.java:134) >> at >> jdk.hotspot.agent/sun.jvm.hotspot.tools.JStack.runWithArgs(JStack.java:90) >> at >> jdk.hotspot.agent/sun.jvm.hotspot.SALauncher.runJSTACK(SALauncher.java:306) >> at >> jdk.hotspot.agent/sun.jvm.hotspot.SALauncher.main(SALauncher.java:507) >> >> >> And also I got following (strange) stacks which causes `AssersionFailure` in >> above: >> >> >> ----------------- 70094 ----------------- >> "ForkJoinPool-1-worker-4" #32 daemon prio=5 tid=0x00007f8f5c371660 nid=70094 >> runnable [0x00007f8f406d9000] >> java.lang.Thread.State: RUNNABLE >> JavaThread state: _thread_in_native >> 0x00007f8f64658462 __syscall_cancel_arch + 0x32 >> 0x00007f8f6464c75c __internal_syscall_cancel + 0x5c >> 0x00007f8f646a8c37 __GI___nanosleep + 0x17 >> 0x00007f8f646bb14e __sleep + 0x3e >> 0x00007f8f4b3a8e1e <nep_invoker_blob> >> 0x00007f8f4b33fe48 * >> java.lang.invoke.LambdaForm$MH+0x000000000c047000.invoke(... > > Yasumasa Suenaga has updated the pull request incrementally with one > additional commit since the last revision: > > Fix trivial bug I fixed for AArch64, and it works fine (in below) on Raspberry Pi 4. ----------------- 1687 ----------------- "ForkJoinPool-1-worker-2" #28 daemon prio=5 tid=0x0000ffff9c697a10 nid=1687 runnable [0x0000ffff70def000] java.lang.Thread.State: RUNNABLE JavaThread state: _thread_in_native 0x0000ffffa3b382e8 __syscall_cancel_arch + 0x28 0x0000ffffa3b68b7c __clock_nanosleep + 0x3c 0x0000ffffa3b73740 __GI___nanosleep + 0x20 0x0000ffffa3b83f50 __sleep + 0x50 0x0000ffff8b15b278 <nep_invoker_blob> 0x0000ffff8b13bd54 * java.lang.invoke.LambdaForm$MH+0x0000000010087000.invoke(java.lang.Object, long, int) bci:10 (Interpreted frame) 0x0000ffff8b13bd54 * java.lang.invoke.LambdaForm$MH+0x0000000010090000.invokeExact_MT(java.lang.Object, long, int, java.lang.Object) bci:21 (Interpreted frame) 0x0000ffff8b13bd54 * jdk.internal.foreign.abi.DowncallStub+0x0000000010088000.invoke(java.lang.foreign.SegmentAllocator, java.lang.foreign.MemorySegment, int) bci:44 (Interpreted frame) 0x0000ffff8b13bd54 * java.lang.invoke.DirectMethodHandle$Holder.invokeStatic(java.lang.Object, java.lang.Object, java.lang.Object, int) bci:14 (Interpreted frame) 0x0000ffff8b13bd54 * java.lang.invoke.LambdaForm$MH+0x000000001008e400.invoke(java.lang.Object, int) bci:44 (Interpreted frame) 0x0000ffff8b13bf24 * java.lang.invoke.LambdaForm$MH+0x000000001008cc00.invoke_MT(java.lang.Object, int, java.lang.Object) bci:18 (Interpreted frame) 0x0000ffff8b13bf24 * Test.run() bci:21 line:28 (Interpreted frame) 0x0000ffff8b13a3b8 <StubRoutines (continuation stubs)> 0x0000ffff8b13bf24 * jdk.internal.vm.Continuation.run() bci:122 line:248 (Interpreted frame) 0x0000ffff8b13bf24 * java.lang.VirtualThread.runContinuation() bci:100 line:293 (Interpreted frame) 0x0000ffff8b13bf24 * java.lang.VirtualThread$$Lambda+0x00000000100fba70.run() bci:4 (Interpreted frame) 0x0000ffff8b13c5b4 * java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask$RunnableExecuteAction.compute() bci:4 line:1753 (Interpreted frame) 0x0000ffff8b13bc50 * java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask$RunnableExecuteAction.compute() bci:1 line:1745 (Interpreted frame) 0x0000ffff8b13bc50 * java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask$InterruptibleTask.exec() bci:51 line:1662 (Interpreted frame) 0x0000ffff8b13bd54 * java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask.doExec() bci:10 line:511 (Interpreted frame) 0x0000ffff8b13bf24 * java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool$WorkQueue.topLevelExec(java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask, int) bci:5 line:1450 (Interpreted frame) 0x0000ffff8b13bf24 * java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool.runWorker(java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool$WorkQueue) bci:364 line:2019 (Interpreted frame) 0x0000ffff8b13bf24 * java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinWorkerThread.run() bci:31 line:187 (Interpreted frame) 0x0000ffff8b13749c <StubRoutines (initial stubs)> 0x0000ffffa24d15c4 JavaCalls::call_helper(JavaValue*, methodHandle const&, JavaCallArguments*, JavaThread*) + 0x474 0x0000ffffa24d1c48 JavaCalls::call_virtual(JavaValue*, Klass*, Symbol*, Symbol*, JavaCallArguments*, JavaThread*) + 0x278 0x0000ffffa24d21e4 JavaCalls::call_virtual(JavaValue*, Handle, Klass*, Symbol*, Symbol*, JavaThread*) + 0x90 0x0000ffffa2668a14 thread_entry(JavaThread*, JavaThread*) + 0xc4 0x0000ffffa2510d18 JavaThread::thread_main_inner() + 0x104 0x0000ffffa30399fc Thread::call_run() + 0xac 0x0000ffffa2b6c69c thread_native_entry(Thread*) + 0x12c 0x0000ffffa3b2e8d4 start_thread + 0x404 ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27728#issuecomment-3393348999
