DZone
Thanks for visiting DZone today,
Edit Profile
  • Manage Email Subscriptions
  • How to Post to DZone
  • Article Submission Guidelines
Sign Out View Profile
  • Post an Article
  • Manage My Drafts
Over 2 million developers have joined DZone.
Log In / Join
Refcards Trend Reports
Events Video Library
Refcards
Trend Reports

Events

View Events Video Library

Related

  • Why Your Test Automation Is Always Behind the Code And the Architecture That Fixes It
  • Good Data, Bad Metric: A Mutation Testing Pattern for Analytics Engineering
  • Agentic Testing: Moving Quality From Checkpoint to Control Layer
  • Why Your QA Engineer Should Be the Most Stubborn Person on the Team

Trending

  • Offline-First Patch Management for 10,000 Edge Nodes: A Practical Architecture That Scales
  • A Hands-On ABAP RESTful Programming Model Guide
  • Building a Production-Ready AI Agent in 2026: Beyond the Hello World Demo
  • Top JavaScript/TypeScript Gen AI Frameworks for 2026
  1. DZone
  2. Software Design and Architecture
  3. Integration
  4. A New Way to Detect Deadlocks During Tests

A New Way to Detect Deadlocks During Tests

This method will let you detect deadlocks during tests by pinpointing when two threads are trying to acquire a lock held by the other thread.

By 
Thomas Krieger user avatar
Thomas Krieger
·
Oct. 20, 17 · Tutorial
Likes (3)
Comment
Save
Tweet
Share
11.0K Views

Join the DZone community and get the full member experience.

Join For Free

In the following article, I want to show you a new way to detect deadlocks during tests. A deadlock happens when two threads are trying to acquire a lock held by the other thread. To detect a deadlock, you need to reach the exact time point when both threads are waiting for the other lock. Let us look at an example:

import java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap;
import java.util.function.BiFunction;
import org.junit.Test;
import org.junit.runner.RunWith;
import com.anarsoft.vmlens.concurrent.junit.ConcurrentTestRunner;
@RunWith(ConcurrentTestRunner.class)
public class TestConcurrentHashMapCompute {
    private final ConcurrentHashMap<Integer,Integer> map = 
        new ConcurrentHashMap<Integer,Integer>();
    public TestConcurrentHashMapCompute()
    {
        map.put(1, 1);
        map.put(2, 2);  
    }
    @Test
    public void update12()
    {
        map.compute( 1 ,            
                new BiFunction<Integer,Integer,Integer>()
                {
                    public Integer apply(Integer k, Integer v) {        
                        map.put( 2 , 1);
                        return v;
                    }
                }
                );
    }
    @Test
    public void update21()
    {
              map.compute( 2 ,              
                new BiFunction<Integer,Integer,Integer>()
                {
                    public Integer apply(Integer k, Integer v) {        
                        map.put( 1 , 1);
                        return v;
                    }
                }
                );
    }
}

The ConcurrentTestRunner runs the JUnit test methods by 4 threads in parallel. The test succeeds at least almost all the time.

One way to see the deadlock hidden in this test is to execute the test by more threads multiple times by a machine with many cores. The other way is to trace the test execution and to analyze the lock order afterward.

We can do this by adding the vmlens agent to the VM arguments of our test. After analyzing the test run vmlens reports the following deadlock:

- deadlock: [email protected]()<->[email protected]()
  parent2Child:
    thread: Thread-4
    stack:
      - java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap.putVal <<[email protected]()>>
      - java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap.put
      - com.anarsoft.vmlens.concurrent.example.TestConcurrentHashMapCompute$2.apply
      - com.anarsoft.vmlens.concurrent.example.TestConcurrentHashMapCompute$2.apply
      - java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap.compute <<[email protected]()>>
      - com.anarsoft.vmlens.concurrent.example.TestConcurrentHashMapCompute.update21
  child2Parent:
    thread: Thread-1
    stack:
      - java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap.putVal <<[email protected]()>>
      - java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap.put
      - com.anarsoft.vmlens.concurrent.example.TestConcurrentHashMapCompute$1.apply
      - com.anarsoft.vmlens.concurrent.example.TestConcurrentHashMapCompute$1.apply
      - java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap.compute <<[email protected]()>>
      - com.anarsoft.vmlens.concurrent.example.TestConcurrentHashMapCompute.update12

Here is the putVal method. The synchronized statement leading to the deadlock is in line 18:

final V putVal(K key, V value, boolean onlyIfAbsent) {
      if (key == null || value == null) throw new NullPointerException();
      int hash = spread(key.hashCode());
      int binCount = 0;
      for (Node<K,V>[] tab = table;;) {
          Node<K,V> f; int n, i, fh;
          if (tab == null || (n = tab.length) == 0)
              tab = initTable();
          else if ((f = tabAt(tab, i = (n - 1) & hash)) == null) {
              if (casTabAt(tab, i, null,
                           new Node<K,V>(hash, key, value, null)))
                  break;                   // no lock when adding to empty bin
          }
          else if ((fh = f.hash) == MOVED)
              tab = helpTransfer(tab, f);
          else {
              V oldVal = null;
              synchronized (f) {
                  // ... omitted    
              }
              if (binCount != 0) {
                  if (binCount >= TREEIFY_THRESHOLD)
                      treeifyBin(tab, i);
                  if (oldVal != null)
                      return oldVal;
                  break;
              }
          }
      }
      addCount(1L, binCount);
      return null;
  }

and the compute method. The synchronized statement leading to the deadlock is in line 19:

public V compute(K key,
                 BiFunction<? super K, ? super V, ? extends V> remappingFunction) {
    if (key == null || remappingFunction == null)
        throw new NullPointerException();
    int h = spread(key.hashCode());
    V val = null;
    int delta = 0;
    int binCount = 0;
    for (Node<K,V>[] tab = table;;) {
        Node<K,V> f; int n, i, fh;
        if (tab == null || (n = tab.length) == 0)
            tab = initTable();
        else if ((f = tabAt(tab, i = (n - 1) & h)) == null) {
             // ... omitted contains call to remappingFunction function   
        }
        else if ((fh = f.hash) == MOVED)
            tab = helpTransfer(tab, f);
        else {
            synchronized (f) {
                // ... omitted contains call to remappingFunction function   
            }
            if (binCount != 0) {
                if (binCount >= TREEIFY_THRESHOLD)
                    treeifyBin(tab, i);
                break;
            }
        }
    }
    if (delta != 0)
        addCount((long)delta, binCount);
    return val;
}


Testing Threading

Published at DZone with permission of Thomas Krieger. See the original article here.

Opinions expressed by DZone contributors are their own.

Related

  • Why Your Test Automation Is Always Behind the Code And the Architecture That Fixes It
  • Good Data, Bad Metric: A Mutation Testing Pattern for Analytics Engineering
  • Agentic Testing: Moving Quality From Checkpoint to Control Layer
  • Why Your QA Engineer Should Be the Most Stubborn Person on the Team

Partner Resources

×

Comments

The likes didn't load as expected. Please refresh the page and try again.

  • RSS
  • X
  • Facebook

ABOUT US

  • About DZone
  • Support and feedback
  • Community research

ADVERTISE

  • Advertise with DZone

CONTRIBUTE ON DZONE

  • Article Submission Guidelines
  • Become a Contributor
  • Core Program
  • Visit the Writers' Zone

LEGAL

  • Terms of Service
  • Privacy Policy

CONTACT US

  • 3343 Perimeter Hill Drive
  • Suite 215
  • Nashville, TN 37211
  • [email protected]

Let's be friends:

  • RSS
  • X
  • Facebook