Tarantool development patches archive
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH luajit][v2] Prevent loop in snap_usedef().
@ 2025-01-16 16:36 Sergey Bronnikov via Tarantool-patches
  2025-01-21 12:27 ` Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches
  2025-01-31  9:29 ` Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Sergey Bronnikov via Tarantool-patches @ 2025-01-16 16:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: tarantool-patches, Sergey Kaplun, Maxim Kokryashkin

Reported by XmiliaH.

(cherry picked from commit 0e66fc96377853d898390f1a02723c54ec3a42f7)

It is possible to get an infinite loop in a function `snap_usedef`
when a `UCLO` makes a tight loop. This infinite loop could happen
when `snap_usedef()` is called on trace exit processes UCLO
bytecode instruction and this instruction attempts a jump with
negative value. The patch fixes the problem by checking a number
of slots in a jump argument and replace this value my `maxslot` if
a value is negative.

Sergey Bronnikov:
* added the description and the test for the problem

Part of tarantool/tarantool#10709
---

Branch: https://github.com/tarantool/luajit/tree/ligurio/lj-736-prevent-loop-in-snap_usedef

Related issues:
* https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/issues/10709
* https://github.com/LuaJIT/LuaJIT/issues/736

v2 changes:

- Updated test, now it hangs without patch with fix.
- Added more comments to the test with explanations.

 src/lj_snap.c                                 |  7 +-
 .../lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua | 82 +++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 88 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
 create mode 100644 test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua

diff --git a/src/lj_snap.c b/src/lj_snap.c
index 8a33dc22..8d7bd868 100644
--- a/src/lj_snap.c
+++ b/src/lj_snap.c
@@ -252,7 +252,12 @@ static BCReg snap_usedef(jit_State *J, uint8_t *udf,
       BCReg minslot = bc_a(ins);
       if (op >= BC_FORI && op <= BC_JFORL) minslot += FORL_EXT;
       else if (op >= BC_ITERL && op <= BC_JITERL) minslot += bc_b(pc[-2])-1;
-      else if (op == BC_UCLO) { pc += bc_j(ins); break; }
+      else if (op == BC_UCLO) {
+	ptrdiff_t delta = bc_j(ins);
+	if (delta < 0) return maxslot;  /* Prevent loop. */
+	pc += delta;
+	break;
+      }
       for (s = minslot; s < maxslot; s++) DEF_SLOT(s);
       return minslot < maxslot ? minslot : maxslot;
       }
diff --git a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..fb053e9a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
@@ -0,0 +1,82 @@
+local tap = require('tap')
+local test = tap.test('lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop'):skipcond({
+  ['Test requires JIT enabled'] = not jit.status(),
+})
+
+test:plan(2)
+
+-- Test reproduces an issue when BC_UCLO triggers an infinite loop.
+-- See details in https://github.com/LuaJIT/LuaJIT/issues/736.
+--
+-- Listing below demonstrates a problem -
+-- the bytecode UCLO on the line 13 makes a loop at 0013-0014:
+--
+-- - BYTECODE -- bc_uclo.lua:0-20
+-- 0001    KPRI     0   0
+-- 0002    FNEW     1   0      ; bc_uclo.lua:5
+-- 0003    KSHORT   2   1
+-- 0004    KSHORT   3   4
+-- 0005    KSHORT   4   1
+-- 0006    FORI     2 => 0011
+-- 0007 => ISNEN    5   0      ; 2
+-- 0008    JMP      6 => 0010
+-- 0009    UCLO     0 => 0012
+-- 0010 => FORL     2 => 0007
+-- 0011 => UCLO     0 => 0012
+-- 0012 => KPRI     0   0
+-- 0013    UCLO     0 => 0012
+-- 0014    FNEW     1   1      ; bc_uclo.lua:18
+-- 0015    UCLO     0 => 0016
+-- 0016 => RET0     0   1
+
+jit.opt.start('hotloop=1')
+
+local assert_msg = 'Infinite loop is not reproduced.'
+local assert = assert
+
+local function testcase()
+  -- The code in the first scope `do`/`end` is a prerequisite.
+  -- It is needed so that we have a trace at the exit from which
+  -- the creation of the snapshot will begin.
+  do
+    -- Upvalue below is not used actually, but it is required
+    -- for calling `snap_usedef()` on trace exit.
+    local uv1 -- luacheck: ignore
+    local _ = function() return uv1 end
+
+    -- The loop below is required for recording a trace.
+    -- The condition inside a loop executes `goto` to a label
+    -- outside of the loop when the code executed by JIT and
+    -- this triggers snapshotting.
+    for i = 1, 2 do
+      -- Exit to interpreter once trace is compiled.
+      if i == 2 then
+        goto x
+      end
+    end
+  end
+
+::x::
+  do
+    local uv2 -- luacheck: no unused
+
+    -- `goto` if not executed without a patch and generates an
+    -- UCLO bytecode that makes an infinite loop in a function
+    -- `snap_usedef` when patch is not applied. `goto` must point
+    -- to the label on one of the previous lines. `assert()` is
+    -- executed when patch is applied.
+    assert(nil, assert_msg)
+    goto x
+
+    -- Line below is required, it makes `uv` upvalue, and must be
+    -- placed after `goto`, otherwise reproducer become broken.
+    local _ = function() return uv2 end -- luacheck: ignore
+  end
+end
+
+local ok, err = pcall(testcase)
+
+test:is(ok, false, 'assertion is triggered in a function with testcase')
+test:ok(err:match(assert_msg), 'BC_UCLO does not trigger an infinite loop')
+
+os.exit(test:check() and 0 or 1)
-- 
2.34.1


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH luajit][v2] Prevent loop in snap_usedef().
  2025-01-16 16:36 [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH luajit][v2] Prevent loop in snap_usedef() Sergey Bronnikov via Tarantool-patches
@ 2025-01-21 12:27 ` Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches
  2025-01-21 14:43   ` Sergey Bronnikov via Tarantool-patches
  2025-01-31  9:29 ` Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches @ 2025-01-21 12:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Sergey Bronnikov; +Cc: tarantool-patches

Hi, Sergey!
Thanks for the patch and the fixes!
LGTM, after fixing my several suggestions about comments rephrasing and
a bunch of nits below.

On 16.01.25, Sergey Bronnikov wrote:
> Reported by XmiliaH.
> 
> (cherry picked from commit 0e66fc96377853d898390f1a02723c54ec3a42f7)
> 
> It is possible to get an infinite loop in a function `snap_usedef`
> when a `UCLO` makes a tight loop. This infinite loop could happen
> when `snap_usedef()` is called on trace exit processes UCLO

It is called during trace recording (more precisely on creation of the
snapshot for the guarded trace check).

> bytecode instruction and this instruction attempts a jump with
> negative value. The patch fixes the problem by checking a number
> of slots in a jump argument and replace this value my `maxslot` if
> a value is negative.

Please also mention that "This means that no values will be purged from
the snapshot".

> 
> Sergey Bronnikov:
> * added the description and the test for the problem
> 
> Part of tarantool/tarantool#10709
> ---
> 
> Branch: https://github.com/tarantool/luajit/tree/ligurio/lj-736-prevent-loop-in-snap_usedef
> 
> Related issues:
> * https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/issues/10709
> * https://github.com/LuaJIT/LuaJIT/issues/736
> 
> v2 changes:
> 
> - Updated test, now it hangs without patch with fix.
> - Added more comments to the test with explanations.
> 
>  src/lj_snap.c                                 |  7 +-
>  .../lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua | 82 +++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 88 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>  create mode 100644 test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
> 
> diff --git a/src/lj_snap.c b/src/lj_snap.c
> index 8a33dc22..8d7bd868 100644
> --- a/src/lj_snap.c
> +++ b/src/lj_snap.c

<snipped>

> diff --git a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000..fb053e9a
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua

Filename suffix should be ".test.lua".
The ctest doesn't recognize this file.

> @@ -0,0 +1,82 @@
> +local tap = require('tap')
> +local test = tap.test('lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop'):skipcond({
> +  ['Test requires JIT enabled'] = not jit.status(),
> +})
> +
> +test:plan(2)
> +
> +-- Test reproduces an issue when BC_UCLO triggers an infinite loop.
> +-- See details in https://github.com/LuaJIT/LuaJIT/issues/736.

Nit: Lets be consistent with most of our test files and put the short
description before the `tap.test()`:

===================================================================
diff --git a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
index fb053e9a..f38098a8 100644
--- a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
+++ b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
@@ -1,13 +1,13 @@
 local tap = require('tap')
+-- Test file to demonstrate the infinite loop in LuaJIT during the
+-- use-def analysis for upvalues.
+-- See also https://github.com/LuaJIT/LuaJIT/issues/736.
 local test = tap.test('lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop'):skipcond({
   ['Test requires JIT enabled'] = not jit.status(),
 })
 
 test:plan(2)
 
--- Test reproduces an issue when BC_UCLO triggers an infinite loop.
--- See details in https://github.com/LuaJIT/LuaJIT/issues/736.
---
 -- Listing below demonstrates a problem -
 -- the bytecode UCLO on the line 13 makes a loop at 0013-0014:
 --
===================================================================

> +--
> +-- Listing below demonstrates a problem -
> +-- the bytecode UCLO on the line 13 makes a loop at 0013-0014:
> +--
> +-- - BYTECODE -- bc_uclo.lua:0-20
> +-- 0001    KPRI     0   0
> +-- 0002    FNEW     1   0      ; bc_uclo.lua:5
> +-- 0003    KSHORT   2   1
> +-- 0004    KSHORT   3   4
> +-- 0005    KSHORT   4   1
> +-- 0006    FORI     2 => 0011
> +-- 0007 => ISNEN    5   0      ; 2
> +-- 0008    JMP      6 => 0010
> +-- 0009    UCLO     0 => 0012
> +-- 0010 => FORL     2 => 0007
> +-- 0011 => UCLO     0 => 0012
> +-- 0012 => KPRI     0   0
> +-- 0013    UCLO     0 => 0012
> +-- 0014    FNEW     1   1      ; bc_uclo.lua:18
> +-- 0015    UCLO     0 => 0016
> +-- 0016 => RET0     0   1

I suggest to list only the necessary part of the bytecodes, also
lets take the bytecode dump for this particular function:

===================================================================
diff --git a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
index f38098a8..8d0558e9 100644
--- a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
+++ b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
@@ -8,27 +8,18 @@ local test = tap.test('lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop'):skipcond({
 
 test:plan(2)
 
--- Listing below demonstrates a problem -
--- the bytecode UCLO on the line 13 makes a loop at 0013-0014:
---
--- - BYTECODE -- bc_uclo.lua:0-20
--- 0001    KPRI     0   0
--- 0002    FNEW     1   0      ; bc_uclo.lua:5
--- 0003    KSHORT   2   1
--- 0004    KSHORT   3   4
--- 0005    KSHORT   4   1
--- 0006    FORI     2 => 0011
--- 0007 => ISNEN    5   0      ; 2
--- 0008    JMP      6 => 0010
--- 0009    UCLO     0 => 0012
--- 0010 => FORL     2 => 0007
--- 0011 => UCLO     0 => 0012
--- 0012 => KPRI     0   0
--- 0013    UCLO     0 => 0012
--- 0014    FNEW     1   1      ; bc_uclo.lua:18
--- 0015    UCLO     0 => 0016
--- 0016 => RET0     0   1
-
+-- Before the patch, the code flow like in the `testcase()` below
+-- may cause the problem -- use-def analysis for the 0019 UCLO
+-- creates an infinite loop in 0014 - 0019:
+-- | 0008 FORI   base:    4 jump:  => 0013
+-- | 0009 ISNEN  var:     7 num:     0 ; number 2
+-- | 0010 JMP    rbase:   8 jump:  => 0012
+-- | 0011 UCLO   rbase:   2 jump:  => 0014
+-- | 0012 FORL   base:    4 jump:  => 0009
+-- | 0013 UCLO   rbase:   2 jump:  => 0014
+-- | 0014 KPRI   dst:     2 pri:     0 ; Start of `assert()` line.
+-- | ...
+-- | 0019 UCLO   rbase:   2 jump:  => 0014
 jit.opt.start('hotloop=1')
 
 local assert_msg = 'Infinite loop is not reproduced.'
===================================================================

> +
> +jit.opt.start('hotloop=1')
> +
> +local assert_msg = 'Infinite loop is not reproduced.'
> +local assert = assert
> +
> +local function testcase()
> +  -- The code in the first scope `do`/`end` is a prerequisite.
> +  -- It is needed so that we have a trace at the exit from which
> +  -- the creation of the snapshot will begin.

The needed part is not the creation of the snapshot but the use-def
analysis for the first (`uv1`) UCLO. I would rephrase it like the
following:

===================================================================
diff --git a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
index 8d0558e9..3e6508d1 100644
--- a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
+++ b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
@@ -27,11 +27,9 @@ local assert = assert
 
 local function testcase()
   -- The code in the first scope `do`/`end` is a prerequisite.
-  -- It is needed so that we have a trace at the exit from which
-  -- the creation of the snapshot will begin.
+  -- It contains the UCLO instruction for the `uv1`. The use-def
+  -- analysis for it escapes this `do`/`end` scope.
   do
-    -- Upvalue below is not used actually, but it is required
-    -- for calling `snap_usedef()` on trace exit.
     local uv1 -- luacheck: ignore
     local _ = function() return uv1 end
 
===================================================================

> +  do
> +    -- Upvalue below is not used actually, but it is required
> +    -- for calling `snap_usedef()` on trace exit.

Side note: The use-def analysis is called on trace recording.
I would rather merge this comment with the comment above, as you can see in
the diff.

> +    local uv1 -- luacheck: ignore

Nit: It is better to use "no unused" here to be more specific.

> +    local _ = function() return uv1 end
> +
> +    -- The loop below is required for recording a trace.
> +    -- The condition inside a loop executes `goto` to a label
> +    -- outside of the loop when the code executed by JIT and
> +    -- this triggers snapshotting.
> +    for i = 1, 2 do
> +      -- Exit to interpreter once trace is compiled.

I would rephrase this 2 comments, since they a little bit misleading:

===================================================================
diff --git a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
index 3e6508d1..a95651fd 100644
--- a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
+++ b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
@@ -33,12 +33,11 @@ local function testcase()
     local uv1 -- luacheck: ignore
     local _ = function() return uv1 end
 
-    -- The loop below is required for recording a trace.
-    -- The condition inside a loop executes `goto` to a label
-    -- outside of the loop when the code executed by JIT and
-    -- this triggers snapshotting.
+    -- Records the trace for which use-def analysis is applied.
     for i = 1, 2 do
-      -- Exit to interpreter once trace is compiled.
+      -- This condition triggers snapshoting and use-def analysis.
+      -- Before the patch this triggers the infinite loop in the
+      -- `snap_usedef()`, so the `goto` is never taken.
       if i == 2 then
         goto x
       end
===================================================================

> +      if i == 2 then
> +        goto x
> +      end
> +    end
> +  end
> +
> +::x::
> +  do
> +    local uv2 -- luacheck: no unused
> +
> +    -- `goto` if not executed without a patch and generates an
> +    -- UCLO bytecode that makes an infinite loop in a function
> +    -- `snap_usedef` when patch is not applied. `goto` must point
> +    -- to the label on one of the previous lines. `assert()` is
> +    -- executed when patch is applied.
> +    assert(nil, assert_msg)
> +    goto x
> +
> +    -- Line below is required, it makes `uv` upvalue, and must be
> +    -- placed after `goto`, otherwise reproducer become broken.
> +    local _ = function() return uv2 end -- luacheck: ignore

I would also rephrase this 2 comments like the following since they
are repeated what we say before:

===================================================================
diff --git a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
index a95651fd..8111d752 100644
--- a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
+++ b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
@@ -47,17 +47,11 @@ local function testcase()
 ::x::
   do
     local uv2 -- luacheck: no unused
-
-    -- `goto` if not executed without a patch and generates an
-    -- UCLO bytecode that makes an infinite loop in a function
-    -- `snap_usedef` when patch is not applied. `goto` must point
-    -- to the label on one of the previous lines. `assert()` is
-    -- executed when patch is applied.
     assert(nil, assert_msg)
+    -- Create a tight loop for the one more upvalue (`uv2`).
+    -- Before the patch, use-def analysis gets stuck in this code
+    -- flow.
     goto x
-
-    -- Line below is required, it makes `uv` upvalue, and must be
-    -- placed after `goto`, otherwise reproducer become broken.
     local _ = function() return uv2 end -- luacheck: ignore
   end
 end
===================================================================

Also I would add the following comment:
| -- This code is unreachable by design. Prevent luacheck warning.

> +  end
> +end
> +
> +local ok, err = pcall(testcase)
> +
> +test:is(ok, false, 'assertion is triggered in a function with testcase')
> +test:ok(err:match(assert_msg), 'BC_UCLO does not trigger an infinite loop')

I would rather say here 'correct error message'. Or, as an alternative,
we may just use 1 test check:

| pcall(testcase)
|
| test:ok(true, 'no infinite loop in the use-def analysis')

instead of these 2 checks.

> +
> +os.exit(test:check() and 0 or 1)

Minor: Please use `test:done(true)` like in all other tests.

> -- 
> 2.34.1
> 

-- 
Best regards,
Sergey Kaplun

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH luajit][v2] Prevent loop in snap_usedef().
  2025-01-21 12:27 ` Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches
@ 2025-01-21 14:43   ` Sergey Bronnikov via Tarantool-patches
  2025-01-21 15:01     ` Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Sergey Bronnikov via Tarantool-patches @ 2025-01-21 14:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Sergey Kaplun; +Cc: tarantool-patches

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 16895 bytes --]

Hi, Sergey!

thanks for the comments! Changes force-pushed.

Sergey

On 21.01.2025 15:27, Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches wrote:
> Hi, Sergey!
> Thanks for the patch and the fixes!
> LGTM, after fixing my several suggestions about comments rephrasing and
> a bunch of nits below.
>
> On 16.01.25, Sergey Bronnikov wrote:
>> Reported by XmiliaH.
>>
>> (cherry picked from commit 0e66fc96377853d898390f1a02723c54ec3a42f7)
>>
>> It is possible to get an infinite loop in a function `snap_usedef`
>> when a `UCLO` makes a tight loop. This infinite loop could happen
>> when `snap_usedef()` is called on trace exit processes UCLO
> It is called during trace recording (more precisely on creation of the
> snapshot for the guarded trace check).
Updated.
>
>> bytecode instruction and this instruction attempts a jump with
>> negative value. The patch fixes the problem by checking a number
>> of slots in a jump argument and replace this value my `maxslot` if
>> a value is negative.
> Please also mention that "This means that no values will be purged from
> the snapshot".

Added.

>
>> Sergey Bronnikov:
>> * added the description and the test for the problem
>>
>> Part of tarantool/tarantool#10709
>> ---
>>
>> Branch:https://github.com/tarantool/luajit/tree/ligurio/lj-736-prevent-loop-in-snap_usedef
>>
>> Related issues:
>> *https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/issues/10709
>> *https://github.com/LuaJIT/LuaJIT/issues/736
>>
>> v2 changes:
>>
>> - Updated test, now it hangs without patch with fix.
>> - Added more comments to the test with explanations.
>>
>>   src/lj_snap.c                                 |  7 +-
>>   .../lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua | 82 +++++++++++++++++++
>>   2 files changed, 88 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>   create mode 100644 test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
>>
>> diff --git a/src/lj_snap.c b/src/lj_snap.c
>> index 8a33dc22..8d7bd868 100644
>> --- a/src/lj_snap.c
>> +++ b/src/lj_snap.c
> <snipped>
>
>> diff --git a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 00000000..fb053e9a
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
> Filename suffix should be ".test.lua".
> The ctest doesn't recognize this file.
Thanks! Fixed.
>
>> @@ -0,0 +1,82 @@
>> +local tap = require('tap')
>> +local test = tap.test('lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop'):skipcond({
>> +  ['Test requires JIT enabled'] = not jit.status(),
>> +})
>> +
>> +test:plan(2)
>> +
>> +-- Test reproduces an issue when BC_UCLO triggers an infinite loop.
>> +-- See details inhttps://github.com/LuaJIT/LuaJIT/issues/736.
> Nit: Lets be consistent with most of our test files and put the short
> description before the `tap.test()`:

Fixed:


--- a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.test.lua
+++ b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.test.lua
@@ -3,11 +3,11 @@ local test = 
tap.test('lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop'):skipcond({
    ['Test requires JIT enabled'] = not jit.status(),
  })

-test:plan(2)
-
  -- Test reproduces an issue when BC_UCLO triggers an infinite loop.
  -- See details in https://github.com/LuaJIT/LuaJIT/issues/736.
---
+
+test:plan(2)
+
  -- Listing below demonstrates a problem -
  -- the bytecode UCLO on the line 13 makes a loop at 0013-0014:
  --

>
> ===================================================================
> diff --git a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
> index fb053e9a..f38098a8 100644
> --- a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
> +++ b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
> @@ -1,13 +1,13 @@
>   local tap = require('tap')
> +-- Test file to demonstrate the infinite loop in LuaJIT during the
> +-- use-def analysis for upvalues.
> +-- See alsohttps://github.com/LuaJIT/LuaJIT/issues/736.
>   local test = tap.test('lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop'):skipcond({
>     ['Test requires JIT enabled'] = not jit.status(),
>   })
>   
>   test:plan(2)
>   
> --- Test reproduces an issue when BC_UCLO triggers an infinite loop.
> --- See details inhttps://github.com/LuaJIT/LuaJIT/issues/736.
> ---
>   -- Listing below demonstrates a problem -
>   -- the bytecode UCLO on the line 13 makes a loop at 0013-0014:
>   --
> ===================================================================
>
>> +--
>> +-- Listing below demonstrates a problem -
>> +-- the bytecode UCLO on the line 13 makes a loop at 0013-0014:
>> +--
>> +-- - BYTECODE -- bc_uclo.lua:0-20
>> +-- 0001    KPRI     0   0
>> +-- 0002    FNEW     1   0      ; bc_uclo.lua:5
>> +-- 0003    KSHORT   2   1
>> +-- 0004    KSHORT   3   4
>> +-- 0005    KSHORT   4   1
>> +-- 0006    FORI     2 => 0011
>> +-- 0007 => ISNEN    5   0      ; 2
>> +-- 0008    JMP      6 => 0010
>> +-- 0009    UCLO     0 => 0012
>> +-- 0010 => FORL     2 => 0007
>> +-- 0011 => UCLO     0 => 0012
>> +-- 0012 => KPRI     0   0
>> +-- 0013    UCLO     0 => 0012
>> +-- 0014    FNEW     1   1      ; bc_uclo.lua:18
>> +-- 0015    UCLO     0 => 0016
>> +-- 0016 => RET0     0   1
> I suggest to list only the necessary part of the bytecodes, also
> lets take the bytecode dump for this particular function:
>
> ===================================================================
> diff --git a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
> index f38098a8..8d0558e9 100644
> --- a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
> +++ b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
> @@ -8,27 +8,18 @@ local test = tap.test('lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop'):skipcond({
>   
>   test:plan(2)
>   
> --- Listing below demonstrates a problem -
> --- the bytecode UCLO on the line 13 makes a loop at 0013-0014:
> ---
> --- - BYTECODE -- bc_uclo.lua:0-20
> --- 0001    KPRI     0   0
> --- 0002    FNEW     1   0      ; bc_uclo.lua:5
> --- 0003    KSHORT   2   1
> --- 0004    KSHORT   3   4
> --- 0005    KSHORT   4   1
> --- 0006    FORI     2 => 0011
> --- 0007 => ISNEN    5   0      ; 2
> --- 0008    JMP      6 => 0010
> --- 0009    UCLO     0 => 0012
> --- 0010 => FORL     2 => 0007
> --- 0011 => UCLO     0 => 0012
> --- 0012 => KPRI     0   0
> --- 0013    UCLO     0 => 0012
> --- 0014    FNEW     1   1      ; bc_uclo.lua:18
> --- 0015    UCLO     0 => 0016
> --- 0016 => RET0     0   1
> -
> +-- Before the patch, the code flow like in the `testcase()` below
> +-- may cause the problem -- use-def analysis for the 0019 UCLO
> +-- creates an infinite loop in 0014 - 0019:
> +-- | 0008 FORI   base:    4 jump:  => 0013
> +-- | 0009 ISNEN  var:     7 num:     0 ; number 2
> +-- | 0010 JMP    rbase:   8 jump:  => 0012
> +-- | 0011 UCLO   rbase:   2 jump:  => 0014
> +-- | 0012 FORL   base:    4 jump:  => 0009
> +-- | 0013 UCLO   rbase:   2 jump:  => 0014
> +-- | 0014 KPRI   dst:     2 pri:     0 ; Start of `assert()` line.
> +-- | ...
> +-- | 0019 UCLO   rbase:   2 jump:  => 0014
>   jit.opt.start('hotloop=1')
>   
>   local assert_msg = 'Infinite loop is not reproduced.'

Fixed:


diff --git 
a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.test.lua 
b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.test.lua
index fb053e9a..30fea28b 100644
--- a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.test.lua
+++ b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.test.lua
@@ -3,31 +3,23 @@ local test = 
tap.test('lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop'):skipcond({
  -- Test reproduces an issue when BC_UCLO triggers an infinite loop.
  -- See details in https://github.com/LuaJIT/LuaJIT/issues/736.
---
--- Listing below demonstrates a problem -
--- the bytecode UCLO on the line 13 makes a loop at 0013-0014:
---
--- - BYTECODE -- bc_uclo.lua:0-20
--- 0001    KPRI     0   0
--- 0002    FNEW     1   0      ; bc_uclo.lua:5
--- 0003    KSHORT   2   1
--- 0004    KSHORT   3   4
--- 0005    KSHORT   4   1
--- 0006    FORI     2 => 0011
--- 0007 => ISNEN    5   0      ; 2
--- 0008    JMP      6 => 0010
--- 0009    UCLO     0 => 0012
--- 0010 => FORL     2 => 0007
--- 0011 => UCLO     0 => 0012
--- 0012 => KPRI     0   0
--- 0013    UCLO     0 => 0012
--- 0014    FNEW     1   1      ; bc_uclo.lua:18
--- 0015    UCLO     0 => 0016
--- 0016 => RET0     0   1
+
+test:plan(2)
+
+-- Before the patch, the code flow like in the `testcase()` below
+-- may cause the problem -- use-def analysis for the 0019 UCLO
+-- creates an infinite loop in 0014 - 0019:
+-- | 0008 FORI   base:    4 jump:  => 0013
+-- | 0009 ISNEN  var:     7 num:     0 ; number 2
+-- | 0010 JMP    rbase:   8 jump:  => 0012
+-- | 0011 UCLO   rbase:   2 jump:  => 0014
+-- | 0012 FORL   base:    4 jump:  => 0009
+-- | 0013 UCLO   rbase:   2 jump:  => 0014
+-- | 0014 KPRI   dst:     2 pri:     0 ; Start of `assert()` line.
+-- | ...
+-- | 0019 UCLO   rbase:   2 jump:  => 0014

  jit.opt.start('hotloop=1')


> ===================================================================
>
>> +
>> +jit.opt.start('hotloop=1')
>> +
>> +local assert_msg = 'Infinite loop is not reproduced.'
>> +local assert = assert
>> +
>> +local function testcase()
>> +  -- The code in the first scope `do`/`end` is a prerequisite.
>> +  -- It is needed so that we have a trace at the exit from which
>> +  -- the creation of the snapshot will begin.
> The needed part is not the creation of the snapshot but the use-def
> analysis for the first (`uv1`) UCLO. I would rephrase it like the
> following:
>
> ===================================================================
> diff --git a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
> index 8d0558e9..3e6508d1 100644
> --- a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
> +++ b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
> @@ -27,11 +27,9 @@ local assert = assert
>   
>   local function testcase()
>     -- The code in the first scope `do`/`end` is a prerequisite.
> -  -- It is needed so that we have a trace at the exit from which
> -  -- the creation of the snapshot will begin.
> +  -- It contains the UCLO instruction for the `uv1`. The use-def
> +  -- analysis for it escapes this `do`/`end` scope.
>     do
> -    -- Upvalue below is not used actually, but it is required
> -    -- for calling `snap_usedef()` on trace exit.
>       local uv1 -- luacheck: ignore
>       local _ = function() return uv1 end

Updated:


@@ -36,11 +28,9 @@ local assert = assert

  local function testcase()
    -- The code in the first scope `do`/`end` is a prerequisite.
-  -- It is needed so that we have a trace at the exit from which
-  -- the creation of the snapshot will begin.
+  -- It contains the UCLO instruction for the `uv1`. The use-def
+  -- analysis for it escapes this `do`/`end` scope.
    do
-    -- Upvalue below is not used actually, but it is required
-    -- for calling `snap_usedef()` on trace exit.
      local uv1 -- luacheck: ignore
      local _ = function() return uv1 end

>   
> ===================================================================
>
>> +  do
>> +    -- Upvalue below is not used actually, but it is required
>> +    -- for calling `snap_usedef()` on trace exit.
> Side note: The use-def analysis is called on trace recording.
> I would rather merge this comment with the comment above, as you can see in
> the diff.
Updated by patch above.
>
>> +    local uv1 -- luacheck: ignore
> Nit: It is better to use "no unused" here to be more specific.
Updated.
>> +    local _ = function() return uv1 end
>> +
>> +    -- The loop below is required for recording a trace.
>> +    -- The condition inside a loop executes `goto` to a label
>> +    -- outside of the loop when the code executed by JIT and
>> +    -- this triggers snapshotting.
>> +    for i = 1, 2 do
>> +      -- Exit to interpreter once trace is compiled.
> I would rephrase this 2 comments, since they a little bit misleading:
>
> ===================================================================
> diff --git a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
> index 3e6508d1..a95651fd 100644
> --- a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
> +++ b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
> @@ -33,12 +33,11 @@ local function testcase()
>       local uv1 -- luacheck: ignore
>       local _ = function() return uv1 end
>   
> -    -- The loop below is required for recording a trace.
> -    -- The condition inside a loop executes `goto` to a label
> -    -- outside of the loop when the code executed by JIT and
> -    -- this triggers snapshotting.
> +    -- Records the trace for which use-def analysis is applied.
>       for i = 1, 2 do
> -      -- Exit to interpreter once trace is compiled.
> +      -- This condition triggers snapshoting and use-def analysis.
> +      -- Before the patch this triggers the infinite loop in the
> +      -- `snap_usedef()`, so the `goto` is never taken.
>         if i == 2 then
>           goto x
>         end
Updated.
> ===================================================================
>
>> +      if i == 2 then
>> +        goto x
>> +      end
>> +    end
>> +  end
>> +
>> +::x::
>> +  do
>> +    local uv2 -- luacheck: no unused
>> +
>> +    -- `goto` if not executed without a patch and generates an
>> +    -- UCLO bytecode that makes an infinite loop in a function
>> +    -- `snap_usedef` when patch is not applied. `goto` must point
>> +    -- to the label on one of the previous lines. `assert()` is
>> +    -- executed when patch is applied.
>> +    assert(nil, assert_msg)
>> +    goto x
>> +
>> +    -- Line below is required, it makes `uv` upvalue, and must be
>> +    -- placed after `goto`, otherwise reproducer become broken.
>> +    local _ = function() return uv2 end -- luacheck: ignore
> I would also rephrase this 2 comments like the following since they
> are repeated what we say before:
>
> ===================================================================
> diff --git a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
> index a95651fd..8111d752 100644
> --- a/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
> +++ b/test/tarantool-tests/lj-736-BC_UCLO-triggers-infinite-loop.lua
> @@ -47,17 +47,11 @@ local function testcase()
>   ::x::
>     do
>       local uv2 -- luacheck: no unused
> -
> -    -- `goto` if not executed without a patch and generates an
> -    -- UCLO bytecode that makes an infinite loop in a function
> -    -- `snap_usedef` when patch is not applied. `goto` must point
> -    -- to the label on one of the previous lines. `assert()` is
> -    -- executed when patch is applied.
>       assert(nil, assert_msg)
> +    -- Create a tight loop for the one more upvalue (`uv2`).
> +    -- Before the patch, use-def analysis gets stuck in this code
> +    -- flow.
>       goto x
> -
> -    -- Line below is required, it makes `uv` upvalue, and must be
> -    -- placed after `goto`, otherwise reproducer become broken.
>       local _ = function() return uv2 end -- luacheck: ignore
>     end
>   end
Updated.
> ===================================================================
>
> Also I would add the following comment:
> | -- This code is unreachable by design. Prevent luacheck warning.
>
Added "-- This code is unreachable by design."
>> +  end
>> +end
>> +
>> +local ok, err = pcall(testcase)
>> +
>> +test:is(ok, false, 'assertion is triggered in a function with testcase')
>> +test:ok(err:match(assert_msg), 'BC_UCLO does not trigger an infinite loop')
> I would rather say here 'correct error message'. Or, as an alternative,

"correct error message" is too general for the specific test.

I left the message the same.

> we may just use 1 test check:
>
> | pcall(testcase)
> |
> | test:ok(true, 'no infinite loop in the use-def analysis')
>
> instead of these 2 checks.
>
>> +
>> +os.exit(test:check() and 0 or 1)
> Minor: Please use `test:done(true)` like in all other tests.

Updated:

@@ -79,4 +64,4 @@ local ok, err = pcall(testcase)
  test:is(ok, false, 'assertion is triggered in a function with testcase')
  test:ok(err:match(assert_msg), 'BC_UCLO does not trigger an infinite 
loop')

-os.exit(test:check() and 0 or 1)
+test:done(true)

>> -- 
>> 2.34.1
>>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 22304 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH luajit][v2] Prevent loop in snap_usedef().
  2025-01-21 14:43   ` Sergey Bronnikov via Tarantool-patches
@ 2025-01-21 15:01     ` Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches @ 2025-01-21 15:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Sergey Bronnikov; +Cc: tarantool-patches

Sergey,
Thanks for the fixes!
LGTM!

-- 
Best regards,
Sergey Kaplun

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH luajit][v2] Prevent loop in snap_usedef().
  2025-01-16 16:36 [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH luajit][v2] Prevent loop in snap_usedef() Sergey Bronnikov via Tarantool-patches
  2025-01-21 12:27 ` Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches
@ 2025-01-31  9:29 ` Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches @ 2025-01-31  9:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Sergey Bronnikov; +Cc: tarantool-patches

Sergey,

I've applied the patch into all long-term branches in tarantool/luajit
and bumped a new version in master [1], release/3.3 [2], release/3.2 [3]
and release/2.11 [4].

[1]: https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/pull/11063
[2]: https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/pull/11064
[3]: https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/pull/11065
[4]: https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/pull/11066

-- 
Best regards,
Sergey Kaplun

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2025-01-31  9:30 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2025-01-16 16:36 [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH luajit][v2] Prevent loop in snap_usedef() Sergey Bronnikov via Tarantool-patches
2025-01-21 12:27 ` Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches
2025-01-21 14:43   ` Sergey Bronnikov via Tarantool-patches
2025-01-21 15:01     ` Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches
2025-01-31  9:29 ` Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox