On 2015/02/07 05:51:36, Yang wrote:
On 2015/02/06 15:13:00, Yang wrote:
I added even more checks and found a bug in the way we encode back
references
to
large objects. It could explain the observed bug. Back references to large
objects is encoded as index, but wrongly shifted by 3 bits (or 2 on 32-bit
platforms). Back reference to the first large object would be encoded
correctly,
but back references to other large objects would be wrong and point to
large
object pages that either do not exist, or have been allocated, but not yet
deserialized into.
VerifyBackReference adds a slight overhead to serialization (about 3-5%),
but
let's have it in there at least for now. We can turn it into a DCHECK at
some
later point if we are confident that this bug is gone.
Nevermind. This does not fix an existing bug. I introduced one during
refactoring to add checks, and mistook it for an existing one. Nevertheless,
adding those checks should help.
https://codereview.chromium.org/909493002/
--
--
v8-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "v8-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
