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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Fix PerfMap lock ordering violation by deferring LogStubs operations #128918
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Fix PerfMap lock ordering violation by deferring LogStubs operations #128918
Changes from all commits
49c6444File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Jump to
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It is not clear to me why we need to introduce the deferred logging to fix the log ordering violation. Is the deferred logging required part of the fix for the deadlock or is it trying to be an additional optimization?
If it is required for some reason, are there negative side-effect? Is it going to introduce a window where the tools that use perfmap can produce bad stacktraces?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If we are working around code like
runtime/src/coreclr/vm/virtualcallstub.cpp
Line 2813 in db87610
I am not sure the
pMayHaveReenteredCooperativeGCModetricks in this code are worth it.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In theory I think this could give us missing symbolication of particular stub stack frames, but I don't expect it to impact the overall unwind. While having 100% correct stacks would be the ideal, pragmatically I imagine the experience would be pretty good most of the time as long as the timing delays are short. If we can get the ideal scenario while still staying low enough risk for a servicing fix of course I'd have no complaints :)
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.