Skip to content
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

Test that crashes Guice inside Guava #1389

Closed

Conversation

swankjesse
Copy link

This test causes Guice to violate the requirements of Guava's
LoadingCache by triggering a recursive load.

The recursive load crashes either with an UncheckedExecutionException
(bad) or causes a deadlock (terrible).

#785

@google-cla google-cla bot added the cla: yes label Sep 1, 2020
@swankjesse swankjesse force-pushed the jwilson.0831.recursive_load branch from b0fe032 to 46e4d12 Compare September 1, 2020 04:31
This test causes Guice to violate the requirements of Guava's
LoadingCache by triggering a recursive load.

The recursive load crashes either with an UncheckedExecutionException
(bad) or causes a deadlock (terrible).

google#785
@swankjesse swankjesse force-pushed the jwilson.0831.recursive_load branch from 46e4d12 to cf780f9 Compare September 1, 2020 12:42
@swankjesse
Copy link
Author

PR that includes this commit plus another commit with a fix:
#1394

copybara-service bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 18, 2023
…nd/or crash inside Guava's LoadingCache. The problem had to do with the fact that Guice eagerly stores uninitialized JIT bindings in an attempt to allow circular dependencies, and Guice also attempts to cleanup failed JIT bindings (to remove these uninitialized JIT bindings). The JIT binding cache was a guard against a recursive call back into the constructor's cache, but we were removing that guard.

We now only remove the guard if we aren't in the process of loading that JIT binding. The failed JIT binding is naturally cleaned up later on, as the existing & new tests attest to.

Fixes many issues:
 - Fixes #1633
 - Fixes #785
 - Fixes #1389
 - Fixes #1394

Many thanks to @swankjesse for the test-case added in #1389 that was helpful in diagnosing the problem, and to @PaulFridrick for the diagnoses in #1633.

PiperOrigin-RevId: 525135213
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants