JDK-8191688 : Assert failed in > 200 tests: failed dependencies, but counter didn't change
  • Type: Bug
  • Component: hotspot
  • Sub-Component: compiler
  • Affected Version: 10
  • Priority: P1
  • Status: Closed
  • Resolution: Fixed
  • Submitted: 2017-11-21
  • Updated: 2020-09-01
  • Resolved: 2017-11-22
The Version table provides details related to the release that this issue/RFE will be addressed.

Unresolved : Release in which this issue/RFE will be addressed.
Resolved: Release in which this issue/RFE has been resolved.
Fixed : Release in which this issue/RFE has been fixed. The release containing this fix may be available for download as an Early Access Release or a General Availability Release.

To download the current JDK release, click here.
JDK 10
10 b34Fixed
Related Reports
Duplicate :  
Duplicate :  
Relates :  
Relates :  
Description
> 200 failures in the nightlies

[2017-11-21T05:29:48.55] debugee.stdout> #  Internal Error (/open/src/hotspot/share/ci/ciEnv.cpp:957), pid=15975, tid=16007
[2017-11-21T05:29:48.55] debugee.stdout> #  assert(counter_changed) failed: failed dependencies, but counter didn't change

Comments
ILW = Assert failure; common case, frequent, easily reproducible; no workaround = HHH = P1
22-11-2017

This looks suspicious, at related to JDK-8160548 and the tests that are failing: if (env->jvmti_can_hotswap_or_post_breakpoint() && can_be_compiled()) { // 6328518 check hotswap conditions under the right lock. MutexLocker locker(Compile_lock); if (Dependencies::check_evol_method(h_m()) != NULL) { _is_c1_compilable = false; _is_c2_compilable = false; } } else { If we still allow the method to be inlined, this this workaround for 6328518 won't work. Do we need a new _refuse_to_parse flag instead?
21-11-2017

I believe this is caused by JDK-8160548. See JDK-8191733, which I just filed, and seems to be the same issue. JDK-8160548 was pushed yesterday and first appeared in the nightly started yesterday.
21-11-2017

Just to be clear, while this is an integration_blocker, this bug does not affect the 2017-11-17 snapshot that Jesper just ran thru PIT. Update: JDK-8190891 fix was pushed on 2017-11-14 so if it is the root cause, then why didn't this bug show up during PIT?
21-11-2017

Why doesn't Klass::clean_weak_klass_links() increment the SystemDictionary modification count?
21-11-2017

This probably has to do with a recent change such as 8043070 or 8190891.
21-11-2017