On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 14:11:39 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$MH+0x000000000c047000.invoke(java.lang.Object, > long, int) bci:10 (Interpreted frame) > 0x00007f8f4b33fe48... I applied the changes to AARCH64Frame.java and they seem to fix the issue with the exception. I'm seeing two different stack traces (see below), and neither is identical to your fixed stack trace. I don't see `<StubRoutines (continuation stubs)>`. Instead I see a frame for `jdk.internal.vm.Continuation.enterSpecial()`. Also, I don't see `<StubRoutines (initial stubs)>` or any of the frames that come after it. Maybe these are just expected platform differences. "ForkJoinPool-1-worker-5" #34 daemon prio=5 tid=0x0000000159051c10 nid=34819 runnable [0x0000000172761000] java.lang.Thread.State: RUNNABLE JavaThread state: _thread_in_native - java.lang.invoke.LambdaForm$MH+0x000003fe01047000.invoke(java.lang.Object, long, int) @bci=10 (Interpreted frame) - java.lang.invoke.LambdaForm$MH+0x000003fe01054800.invokeExact_MT(java.lang.Object, long, int, java.lang.Object) @bci=21 (Interpreted frame) - jdk.internal.foreign.abi.DowncallStub+0x000003fe01048000.invoke(java.lang.foreign.SegmentAllocator, java.lang.foreign.MemorySegment, int) @bci=44 (Interpreted frame) - java.lang.invoke.LambdaForm$DMH+0x000003fe01048400.invokeStaticInit(java.lang.Object, java.lang.Object, java.lang.Object, int) @bci=14 (Interpreted frame) - java.lang.invoke.LambdaForm$MH+0x000003fe0104f400.invoke(java.lang.Object, int) @bci=44 (Interpreted frame) - java.lang.invoke.LambdaForm$MH+0x000003fe0104e400.invoke_MT(java.lang.Object, int, java.lang.Object) @bci=18 (Interpreted frame) - Test.run() @bci=21, line=28 (Interpreted frame) - jdk.internal.vm.Continuation.enterSpecial(jdk.internal.vm.Continuation, boolean, boolean) @bci=0 (Compiled frame) - jdk.internal.vm.Continuation.run() @bci=152, line=251 (Interpreted frame) - java.lang.VirtualThread.runContinuation() @bci=100, line=293 (Interpreted frame) - java.lang.VirtualThread$$Lambda+0x000003fe01027670.run() @bci=4 (Interpreted frame) - java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask$RunnableExecuteAction.compute() @bci=4, line=1753 (Interpreted frame) - java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask$RunnableExecuteAction.compute() @bci=1, line=1745 (Interpreted frame) - java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask$InterruptibleTask.exec() @bci=51, line=1662 (Interpreted frame) - java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask.doExec() @bci=10, line=511 (Interpreted frame) - java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool$WorkQueue.topLevelExec(java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask, int) @bci=5, line=1450 (Interpreted frame) - java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool.runWorker(java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool$WorkQueue) @bci=364, line=2019 (Interpreted frame) - java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinWorkerThread.run() @bci=31, line=187 (Interpreted frame) "ForkJoinPool-1-worker-6" #36 daemon prio=5 tid=0x0000000159052610 nid=42243 runnable [0x000000017296d000] java.lang.Thread.State: RUNNABLE JavaThread state: _thread_in_native - java.lang.invoke.LambdaForm$MH+0x000003fe01047000.invoke(java.lang.Object, long, int) @bci=10 (Interpreted frame) - java.lang.invoke.LambdaForm$MH+0x000003fe01054800.invokeExact_MT(java.lang.Object, long, int, java.lang.Object) @bci=21 (Interpreted frame) - jdk.internal.foreign.abi.DowncallStub+0x000003fe01048000.invoke(java.lang.foreign.SegmentAllocator, java.lang.foreign.MemorySegment, int) @bci=44 (Interpreted frame) - java.lang.invoke.DirectMethodHandle$Holder.invokeStatic(java.lang.Object, java.lang.Object, java.lang.Object, int) @bci=14 (Interpreted frame) - java.lang.invoke.LambdaForm$MH+0x000003fe01050400.invoke(java.lang.Object, int) @bci=44 (Interpreted frame) - java.lang.invoke.LambdaForm$MH+0x000003fe0104e400.invoke_MT(java.lang.Object, int, java.lang.Object) @bci=18 (Interpreted frame) - Test.run() @bci=21, line=28 (Interpreted frame) - java.lang.Thread.runWith(java.lang.Object, java.lang.Runnable) @bci=5, line=1487 (Interpreted frame) - java.lang.VirtualThread.run(java.lang.Runnable) @bci=62, line=456 (Interpreted frame) - java.lang.VirtualThread$VThreadContinuation$1.run() @bci=15, line=248 (Interpreted frame) - jdk.internal.vm.Continuation.enter0() @bci=4, line=322 (Interpreted frame) - jdk.internal.vm.Continuation.enter(jdk.internal.vm.Continuation, boolean) @bci=1, line=313 (Interpreted frame) - jdk.internal.vm.Continuation.enterSpecial(jdk.internal.vm.Continuation, boolean, boolean) @bci=0 (Compiled frame) - jdk.internal.vm.Continuation.run() @bci=122, line=248 (Interpreted frame) - java.lang.VirtualThread.runContinuation() @bci=100, line=293 (Interpreted frame) - java.lang.VirtualThread$$Lambda+0x000003fe01027670.run() @bci=4 (Interpreted frame) - java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask$RunnableExecuteAction.compute() @bci=4, line=1753 (Interpreted frame) - java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask$RunnableExecuteAction.compute() @bci=1, line=1745 (Interpreted frame) - java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask$InterruptibleTask.exec() @bci=51, line=1662 (Interpreted frame) - java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask.doExec() @bci=10, line=511 (Interpreted frame) - java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool$WorkQueue.topLevelExec(java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask, int) @bci=5, line=1450 (Interpreted frame) - java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool.runWorker(java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool$WorkQueue) @bci=364, line=2019 (Interpreted frame) - java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinWorkerThread.run() @bci=31, line=187 (Interpreted frame) ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27728#issuecomment-3392130193
