From: Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org> To: Igor Munkin <imun@tarantool.org> Cc: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH luajit] Fix frame traversal for __gc handler frames. Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2021 13:42:51 +0300 [thread overview] Message-ID: <YYj/K92PEGBte5Qo@root> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20211102160844.GF8831@tarantool.org> Igor, Thanks for the review! On 02.11.21, Igor Munkin wrote: > Sergey, > > Thanks for the patch! Please, consider my comments below. > > On 08.10.21, Sergey Kaplun wrote: > > Hi, Sergos! > > > > Thanks for the review! > > > > <snipped> > > > > > The new commit message is the following: > > > > | Fix frame traversal for __gc handler frames. > > | > > | Reported by Changochen. > > | > > | (cherry picked from 53f82e6e2e858a0a62fd1a2ff47e9866693382e6) > > | > > | A cframe unwinding is missed for a C protected frame during a search for > > | an error function to handle a runtime error. It leads to undefined > > | behaviour or crash, when raising a runtime error on stack with the CP > > | frame before an error function handler (for example, an error in __gc > > | handler). > > | > > | This patch adds missing unwinding for CP frame. > > | > > | Sergey Kaplun: > > | * added the description and the test for the problem > > > > Branch is force-pushed. > > > > > > > > > > Branch: https://github.com/tarantool/luajit/tree/skaplun/lj-601-fix-gc-finderrfunc > > > > Tarantool branch: https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/tree/skaplun/gh-noticket-fix-gc-finderrfunc > > > > LuaJIT issue: https://github.com/LuaJIT/LuaJIT/issues/601 > > > > > > > > src/lj_err.c | 1 + > > > > .../lj-601-fix-gc-finderrfunc.test.lua | 25 +++++++++++++++++++ > > > > 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+) > > > > create mode 100644 test/tarantool-tests/lj-601-fix-gc-finderrfunc.test.lua > > > > > > <snipped> > > > > > diff --git a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-601-fix-gc-finderrfunc.test.lua b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-601-fix-gc-finderrfunc.test.lua > > > > new file mode 100644 > > > > index 00000000..d8d79100 > > > > --- /dev/null > > > > +++ b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-601-fix-gc-finderrfunc.test.lua > > > > > > Unfortunately the test passes on the ’tarantool’ branch > > > > > > s-ostanevich:luajit s.ostanevich$ git checkout tarantool > > > Switched to branch 'tarantool' > > > s-ostanevich:luajit s.ostanevich$ git clean -xdff > > > […] > > > s-ostanevich:luajit s.ostanevich$ cmake . > > > […] > > > s-ostanevich:luajit s.ostanevich$ make > > > […] > > > [100%] Built target libluajit_shared > > > [100%] Built target libluajit > > > [100%] Built target luajit > > > s-ostanevich:luajit s.ostanevich$ git checkout skaplun/lj-601-fix-gc-finderrfunc > > > s-ostanevich:luajit s.ostanevich$ cd test/tarantool-tests > > > s-ostanevich:tarantool-tests s.ostanevich$ ../../src/luajit lj-601-fix-gc-finderrfunc.test.lua > > > TAP version 13 > > > 1..1 > > > ok - successfully collectgarbage with error > > > > Wild guess: it doesn't fail on Mac due to GC64 ;). > > See CI [1] to check my hypothesis. > > Is it possible to fix the test chunk making it check the error even with > GC64 enabled? Yes, may be, but it is hard to forecast its behaviour: We need to generate some garbage on the C stack to be used as an errfunc value from the unprotected C frame suggested as C protected frame (since `cframe_prev()` unwinding is missing for C protected frame (*). (*) I.e. C frames are the following CP|C|CP and during handling the second CP frame in finderrfunc we return the errfunc for the unprotected C frame. > > > > > > > > > > @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ > > > > +local tap = require('tap') > > > > + > > > > +local test = tap.test('lj-601-fix-gc-finderrfunc') > > > > +test:plan(1) > > > > + > > > > +-- Test file to demonstrate LuaJIT incorrect behaviour, when > > > > +-- throwing error in __gc finalizer. > > > > +-- See also, https://github.com/LuaJIT/LuaJIT/issues/601. > > > > + > > > > +collectgarbage() > > > > + > > > > +local a = newproxy(true) > > > > +getmetatable(a).__gc = function() > > > > + -- Function to raise error via `lj_err_run()` inside __gc. > > What does exactly raise an error in this function? `collectgarbage()` returns number and attemt to call this number raises an error. > > > > > + local _ = load(function() collectgarbage()() end) > > > > +end > > > > + > > > > +-- XXX: Generate a small bunch of proxies. Need several to call > > > > +-- `collectgarbage()` on another proxy inside __gc. N cycles is > > > > +-- empirical number. > > Why do you even need this loop? Why can't you just assign nil to <a>? We need to create a chain with C|CP frames to use errfunction value (that is garbage) from C frame as it was from C protected frame. Add the corresponding comment. See the iterative patch below. Branch is force-pushed. > > > > > +for _ = 1, 4 do newproxy(a) end > > > > +collectgarbage('collect') > > > > + > > > > +test:ok(true, 'successfully collectgarbage with error') > > Minor: I propose to reword the following way: > | error in __gc is successfully handled Fixed. Side note: 4 cycles is not enough sometimes (test is flaky) -- change them to 6. See no false positives oks after the changes without fix. =================================================================== diff --git a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-601-fix-gc-finderrfunc.test.lua b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-601-fix-gc-finderrfunc.test.lua index d8d79100..38248c5b 100644 --- a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-601-fix-gc-finderrfunc.test.lua +++ b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-601-fix-gc-finderrfunc.test.lua @@ -16,10 +16,12 @@ getmetatable(a).__gc = function() end -- XXX: Generate a small bunch of proxies. Need several to call --- `collectgarbage()` on another proxy inside __gc. N cycles is --- empirical number. -for _ = 1, 4 do newproxy(a) end +-- `collectgarbage()` on another proxy inside __gc to get mix from +-- C and C protected frames (we call `collectgarbage()` that +-- starts finalizer in __gc metamethod which calls +-- `collectgarbage()` again). N cycles is empirical number. +for _ = 1, 6 do newproxy(a) end collectgarbage('collect') -test:ok(true, 'successfully collectgarbage with error') +test:ok(true, 'error in __gc is successfully handled') os.exit(test:check() and 0 or 1) =================================================================== > > > > > +os.exit(test:check() and 0 or 1) > > > > -- > > > > 2.31.0 > > > > > > > > > > > [1]: https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/tree/skaplun/gh-noticket-fix-gc-finderrfunc-no-fix > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > Sergey Kaplun > > -- > Best regards, > IM -- Best regards, Sergey Kaplun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-08 10:44 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-10-05 10:28 Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches 2021-10-07 16:31 ` sergos via Tarantool-patches 2021-10-08 8:39 ` Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches 2021-10-14 8:58 ` sergos via Tarantool-patches 2021-11-02 16:08 ` Igor Munkin via Tarantool-patches 2021-11-08 10:42 ` Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches [this message] 2021-11-23 12:57 ` Igor Munkin via Tarantool-patches
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=YYj/K92PEGBte5Qo@root \ --to=tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org \ --cc=imun@tarantool.org \ --cc=skaplun@tarantool.org \ --subject='Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH luajit] Fix frame traversal for __gc handler frames.' \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox