avoid overflow on functionality to print backtrace of safepoint straggler #57579
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
d-netto
added
embarrassing-bugfix
3 tasks
d-netto
force-pushed
the
dcn-avoid-overflow-on-safepoint-straggler
branch
from
c75da4a to
89bc82b
Compare
d-netto
force-pushed
the
dcn-avoid-overflow-on-safepoint-straggler
branch
2 times, most recently
from
9a57c9f to
273556c
Compare
d-netto
force-pushed
the
dcn-avoid-overflow-on-safepoint-straggler
branch
from
273556c to
1995bac
Compare
Member
|
I guess this has to be backported to v1.12? |
Member
Author
|
Yes, it does. Thanks for noticing that. |
d-netto
added a commit
to RelationalAI/julia
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 2, 2025
…gler (JuliaLang#57579) In the line of C code: ```C const int64_t timeout = jl_options.timeout_for_safepoint_straggler_s * 1000000000; ``` `jl_options.timeout_for_safepoint_straggler_s` is an `int16_t` and `1000000000` is an `int32_t`. The result of `jl_options.timeout_for_safepoint_straggler_s * 1000000000` will be an `int32_t` which may not be large enough to hold the value of `jl_options.timeout_for_safepoint_straggler_s` after converting to nanoseconds, leading to overflow.
d-netto
added a commit
to RelationalAI/julia
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 2, 2025
…gler (JuliaLang#57579) In the line of C code: ```C const int64_t timeout = jl_options.timeout_for_safepoint_straggler_s * 1000000000; ``` `jl_options.timeout_for_safepoint_straggler_s` is an `int16_t` and `1000000000` is an `int32_t`. The result of `jl_options.timeout_for_safepoint_straggler_s * 1000000000` will be an `int32_t` which may not be large enough to hold the value of `jl_options.timeout_for_safepoint_straggler_s` after converting to nanoseconds, leading to overflow.
KristofferC
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 3, 2025
…gler (#57579) In the line of C code: ```C const int64_t timeout = jl_options.timeout_for_safepoint_straggler_s * 1000000000; ``` `jl_options.timeout_for_safepoint_straggler_s` is an `int16_t` and `1000000000` is an `int32_t`. The result of `jl_options.timeout_for_safepoint_straggler_s * 1000000000` will be an `int32_t` which may not be large enough to hold the value of `jl_options.timeout_for_safepoint_straggler_s` after converting to nanoseconds, leading to overflow. (cherry picked from commit 9cafd35)
KristofferC
removed
the
backport 1.12
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In the line of C code:
jl_options.timeout_for_safepoint_straggler_sis anint16_tand1000000000is anint32_t.The result of
jl_options.timeout_for_safepoint_straggler_s * 1000000000will be anint32_twhich may not be large enough to hold the value ofjl_options.timeout_for_safepoint_straggler_safter converting to nanoseconds, leading to overflow.