Hi, Sergey, see the answer below Sergey On 3/4/26 12:49, Sergey Kaplun wrote: > Sergey, > > On 16.02.26, Sergey Bronnikov wrote: >> Hi, Sergey, >> >> thanks for review! >> >> On 2/11/26 11:30, Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches wrote: >>> On 10.12.25, Sergey Bronnikov wrote: > > >>>> diff --git a/src/lj_dispatch.c b/src/lj_dispatch.c >>>> index a44a5adf..431cb3c2 100644 >>>> --- a/src/lj_dispatch.c >>>> +++ b/src/lj_dispatch.c >>>> @@ -453,7 +453,7 @@ static int call_init(lua_State *L, GCfunc *fn) >>>> int numparams = pt->numparams; >>>> int gotparams = (int)(L->top - L->base); >>>> int need = pt->framesize; >>>> - if ((pt->flags & PROTO_VARARG)) need += 1+gotparams; >>>> + if ((pt->flags & PROTO_VARARG)) need += 1+LJ_FR2+gotparams; >>>> lj_state_checkstack(L, (MSize)need); >>>> numparams -= gotparams; >>>> return numparams >= 0 ? numparams : 0; >>> Let's add an additional test for this part of code (since we don't have >>> any). It may be taken from [1]. It doesn't fail now, but we may cover >>> this branch more precise. >> Don't get what do you mean. >> >> true branch in gc32 is covered by the following tests: >> >> test/LuaJIT-tests >> test/PUC-Rio-Lua-5.1-tests >> test/tarantool-c-tests/lj-1087-vm-handler-call.c_test >> test/tarantool-tests/fix-ff-select-recording.test.lua >> test/tarantool-tests/fix-mips64-spare-side-exit-patching.test.lua >> test/tarantool-tests/fix-slot-check-for-mm-record.test.lua >> test/tarantool-tests/fix-slots-overflow-for-varg-record.test.lua >> test/tarantool-tests/gh-6098-fix-side-exit-patching-on-arm64.test.lua >> test/tarantool-tests/lj-1024-varg-maxslot.test.lua >> test/tarantool-tests/lj-1025-tsetm-maxslot.test.lua >> test/tarantool-tests/lj-1026-arm64-invalid-hrefk-offset-check.test.lua >> test/tarantool-tests/lj-1046-fix-bc-varg-recording.test.lua >> test/tarantool-tests/lj-1164-record-meta-concat-varg-pcall.test.lua >> test/tarantool-tests/lj-1295-bad-renames-for-sunk-values.test.lua >> test/tarantool-tests/lj-584-bad-renames-for-sunk-values.test.lua >> test/tarantool-tests/lj-704-bc-varg-use-def.test.lua > Just the true branch isn't enough. We need the true branch when the > stack needs to be reallocated, like in the [1]. When I check this issue > (with 1 removed) none of our tests catches the incorrect behaviour. You > may refer to the test like lj-1402-vararg-realloc-check.test.lua. The > comment in the test should clarify that this is to avoid regressions in > the future. A new file with test was added (see test/tarantool-tests/gh-1402-call_init-regression.test.lua). The branch was force-pushed. > > >>> [1]:https://github.com/LuaJIT/LuaJIT/issues/1402#issue-3569942423 >>>