libjvm crash due to stack overflow in executables with 32k tbss/tdata

Problem summary: When a large TLS (Thread local storage) size is set for threads, JVM is throwing stack overflow exception.

Problem Identified:
As per investigation and a discussion we came to the conclusion that issue is not with the JVM but it lies in the way glibc has been implemented. When a TLS is declared , it steals the space from threads stack size. So if a thread is created with small stack size, and TLS is setted to a large value, then it will result in StackOverflow. This is the exact case in this bug where reaper thread is allocated a very low stack size 32768.

Discussion thread:
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-December/037558.html

Solution proposed:
Its expected to get fix in glibc sometime , but for now I propose a workaround, a boolean system property "processReaperUseDefaultStackSize"
using which we can set the stack size for reaper thread to default instead of fix 32768. This property can be set by the user using "-D" or "System.setProperty()".
I have tested this fix, it works well with TLS size between 32k to 128k.

Fix:
diff -r 5c4530bb9ae6
src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/ProcessHandleImpl.java
--- a/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/ProcessHandleImpl.java Fri Jan 08 13:06:29 2016 +0800
+++ b/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/ProcessHandleImpl.java Tue
Jan 12 15:55:50 2016 +0530
@@ -83,9 +83,13 @@
                  ThreadGroup systemThreadGroup = tg;

                  ThreadFactory threadFactory = grimReaper -> {
- // Our thread stack requirement is quite modest.
- Thread t = new Thread(systemThreadGroup, grimReaper,
- "process reaper", 32768);
+ Thread t = null;
+ if
(Boolean.getBoolean("processReaperUseDefaultStackSize")) {
+ t = new Thread(systemThreadGroup, grimReaper,
"process reaper");
+ } else {
+ // Our thread stack requirement is quite modest.
+ t = new Thread(systemThreadGroup, grimReaper,
"process reaper", 32768);
+ }
                      t.setDaemon(true);
                      // A small attempt (probably futile) to avoid priority inversion
                      t.setPriority(Thread.MAX_PRIORITY);



For test case please check the attached file.