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
next prev parent 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