Re: <jemalloc>: jemalloc_arena.c:182: Failed assertion: "p[i] == 0"

On May 7, 2012, at 12:19 PM, Steve Wills wrote:
>> On Apr 21, 2012, at 11:54 AM, David Wolfskill wrote:
>>> After applying Dimitry Andric's patches to contrib/jemalloc and
>>> replacing
>>> /usr/bin/as with one built last Sunday, I was finally(!) able to rebuild
>>> head as of 234536:
>>> 
>>> FreeBSD freebeast.catwhisker.org 10.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT #797
>>> 234536M: Sat Apr 21 10:23:33 PDT 2012
>>> root_at_freebeast.catwhisker.org:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC  i386
>>> 
>>> However, as I was copying a /usr/obj hierarchy via tar -- e.g.:
>>> 
>>> root_at_freebeast:/common/home/david # (cd /var/tmp && rm -fr obj && mkdir
>>> obj) && (cd /usr && tar cpf - obj) | (cd /var/tmp && tar xpf -)
>>> 
>>> it ran for a while, then:
>>> 
>>> <jemalloc>: jemalloc_arena.c:182: Failed assertion: "p[i] == 0"
>>> Abort (core dumped)
>>> root_at_freebeast:/common/home/david # echo $?
>>> 134
>>> root_at_freebeast:/common/home/david # ls -lTio *.core
>>> ls: No match.
>>> root_at_freebeast:/common/home/david #
>>> 
>>> So ... no core file, apparently.
>>> 
>>> freebeast(10.0-C)[2] find /usr/src/contrib/jemalloc -type f -name
>>> jemalloc_arena.c
>>> freebeast(10.0-C)[3]
>>> 
>>> No file named "jemalloc_arena.c", either.
>>> 
>>> But contrib/jemalloc/src/arena.c contains a function,
>>> arena_chunk_validate_zeroed():
>>> 
>>>   175 static inline void
>>>   176 arena_chunk_validate_zeroed(arena_chunk_t *chunk, size_t run_ind)
>>>   177 {
>>>   178         size_t i;
>>>   179         UNUSED size_t *p = (size_t *)((uintptr_t)chunk + (run_ind
>>> << LG_PAGE));
>>>   180
>>>   181         for (i = 0; i < PAGE / sizeof(size_t); i++)
>>>   182                 assert(p[i] == 0);
>>>   183 }
>>> 
>>> Thoughts?
>> 
>> I received a similar report yesterday in the context of filezilla, but
>> didn't get as far as reproducing it.  I think the problem is in
>> chunk_alloc_dss(), which dangerously claims that newly allocated memory is
>> zeroed.  It looks like I formalized this bad assumption in early 2010,
>> though the bug existed before that.  It's a bigger deal now because sbrk()
>> is preferred over mmap(), so the bug has languished for a couple of years.
>> I'll get a fix committed today (and revert the order of preference
>> between sbrk() and mmap()).
>> 
>> By the way, I wonder why not everyone hits this (I don't).
> 
> I just now hit the same issue while using ports tinderbox. It was calling
> tar during the "makeJail" tinderbox subcommand and gave the same error as
> in the subject. Funny thing is I had run the same command (on a different
> "jail") right before this and didn't get the error. What's the status of
> this? Should I set MALLOC_PRODUCTION=yes in /etc/make.conf, rebuild world
> and forget about it?

How recent is your system?  This problem should have been fixed by r234569, so if you're still seeing problems after that revision, there's another problem we need to figure out.  (By the way, it's possible for an application to trigger this assertion, but unlikely.)

Thanks,
Jason