Bug 156350 - stress/computed-function-names.js.dfg-maximal-flush-validate-no-cjit is failing
Summary: stress/computed-function-names.js.dfg-maximal-flush-validate-no-cjit is failing
Status: ASSIGNED
Alias: None
Product: WebKit
Classification: Unclassified
Component: JavaScriptCore (show other bugs)
Version: WebKit Nightly Build
Hardware: Unspecified Unspecified
: P2 Normal
Assignee: Mark Lam
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2016-04-07 11:09 PDT by Jiewen Tan
Modified: 2016-04-07 13:20 PDT (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Jiewen Tan 2016-04-07 11:09:00 PDT
JSC test: stress/computed-function-names.js.dfg-maximal-flush-validate-no-cjit is failing on this build:
https://build.webkit.org/builders/Apple%20El%20Capitan%2032-bit%20JSC%20%28BuildAndTest%29/builds/2020

These are the JSC changes included in this build, I am not sure which one is directly related the failing.
https://trac.webkit.org/changeset/199140
https://trac.webkit.org/changeset/199144

Error log:
stress/computed-function-names.js.dfg-maximal-flush-validate-no-cjit: test_script_9910: line 2:  7270 Segmentation fault: 11  ( "$@" ../../.vm/JavaScriptCore.framework/Resources/jsc --useFTLJIT\=false --useFunctionDotArguments\=true --validateGraph\=true --useMaximalFlushInsertionPhase\=true --useConcurrentJIT\=false --thresholdForJITAfterWarmUp\=100 computed-function-names.js )
stress/computed-function-names.js.dfg-maximal-flush-validate-no-cjit: ERROR: Unexpected exit code: 139
FAIL: stress/computed-function-names.js.dfg-maximal-flush-validate-no-cjit
Comment 1 Mark Lam 2016-04-07 11:18:05 PDT
I'll take a first stab at this.
Comment 2 Mark Lam 2016-04-07 12:36:37 PDT
I've tried running the test manually on a local debug build of ToT (r199166), but have absolutely no luck in reproducing this.
Comment 3 Ryan Haddad 2016-04-07 13:18:19 PDT
(In reply to comment #2)
> I've tried running the test manually on a local debug build of ToT
> (r199166), but have absolutely no luck in reproducing this.

If relevant, it only appears to be failing on 32-bit testers,
Comment 4 Mark Lam 2016-04-07 13:20:47 PDT
(In reply to comment #3)
> If relevant, it only appears to be failing on 32-bit testers,

I am testing on a 32-bit build.  No repro.  I'm currently hijacking the bot to see if it's introducing any special sauce into the mix that makes this happen.