Tarantool development patches archive
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>
To: Maxim Kokryashkin <m.kokryashkin@tarantool.org>
Cc: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org,
	Maxim Kokryashkin <max.kokryashkin@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH luajit] Fix memory probing allocator to check for valid end address, too.
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2023 13:03:27 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZIL476yY8INBcC2b@root> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1686142983.790793793@f123.i.mail.ru>

Hi, Maxim!
Thanks for the fixes!
LGTM, just a few typos.

On 07.06.23, Maxim Kokryashkin wrote:
> 
> Hi!
> Thanks for the review!
>  
> > 
> >>Hi, Maxim!
> >>Thanks for the patch!
> >>The patch is LGTM except a few insiginificant nits below.
> >>
> >>But I'm wondering: can we examine a test case mentioned in the [1]?
> >>I.e. create a really long trace, near the upper bound of the 2GB, so
> >>its results become meaningless? You may take a look into
> >><test/tarantool-tests/gh-4199-gc64-fuse.test.lua> or
> >><test/tarantool-tests/gh-6098-fix-side-exit-patching-on-arm64.test.lua>
> >>for the inspiration.
> >>
> >>This is desired to show actual problem, and not changes in some
> >>synthetic behaviour.
> >As we discussed offline, I’ve added the following comment, branch is force-pushed:
> >=============================================
> >+-- XXX: This test allocates `cdata` objects, but in real world
> >+-- scenarios it can be any object that is allocated with
> >+-- LuaJIT's allocator, including, for example, trace, if it
> >+-- has been allocated close enough to the memory region
> >+-- upper bound and if it is long enough.
> >+--
> >+-- When this issue occurrs with a trace, it may lead to

Typo: s/occurrs/occurs/

> >+-- failures in checks that rely on pointers being 32-bit.

Typo: s/checks/the checks/

> >+-- For example, you can see one here: src/lj_asm_x86.h:370.
> >+--
> >+-- Although it is nice to have a reproducer that shows how
> >+-- that issue can affect a non-synthetic execution, it is really
> >+-- hard to achieve the described situation with traces because
> >+-- allocations are hint-based and there is no robust enough
> >+-- way to create a deterministic test for this behavior.
> >=============================================

<snipped>

> >>
> >>--
> >>Best regards,
> >>Sergey Kaplun
> >--
> >Best regards,
> >Maxim Kokryashkin
> > 

-- 
Best regards,
Sergey Kaplun

  reply	other threads:[~2023-06-09 10:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-05-31 13:28 Maxim Kokryashkin via Tarantool-patches
2023-06-06 13:51 ` Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches
2023-06-07 13:03   ` Maxim Kokryashkin via Tarantool-patches
2023-06-09 10:03     ` Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches [this message]
2023-06-13  9:25       ` Maxim Kokryashkin via Tarantool-patches
2023-07-03  8:24 ` Igor Munkin via Tarantool-patches
2023-07-04 17:10 ` 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=ZIL476yY8INBcC2b@root \
    --to=tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org \
    --cc=m.kokryashkin@tarantool.org \
    --cc=max.kokryashkin@gmail.com \
    --cc=skaplun@tarantool.org \
    --subject='Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH luajit] Fix memory probing allocator to check for valid end address, too.' \
    /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