IssueTracker

Thanks for the report! Would it be possible for you to share an Android Studio reproduction project, or the input class files from the build that leads to the above error? It is possible to dump the input program class files using R8 by building with ./gradlew assembleRelease --no-daemon -Dcom.android.tools.r8.dumpinputtodirectory=/path/to/dir.

If you prefer to share it privately you can share it with christofferqa@google.com or zerny@google.com.

I am getting somewhat of a similiar issue.

below are my logs BUT the thing is my app can be started BUT my retrofit calls are selectively hanging and waiting for a response forever essentially stuck, while other calls are running ok.

I do not know if its the same issue, downgrading to r8 1.6.89 solves the problem. I see the below logs when i start my app, i do not know if its related.

W  Opening an oat file without a class loader. Are you using the deprecated DexFile APIs?
W  Method Landroidx/core/app/j$d;.a is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Landroidx/core/app/j$d;.b is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Landroidx/core/app/j$d;.c is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Landroidx/core/app/j$d;.d is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Landroidx/core/app/j$d;.e is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Landroidx/core/app/j$d;.f is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Landroidx/core/app/j$d;.g is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Landroidx/core/app/n;.c is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Landroidx/core/app/n;.d is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Landroidx/core/app/n;.e is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Landroidx/core/app/n;.f is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Landroidx/core/app/n;.g is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Landroidx/core/app/n;.h is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Landroidx/core/app/n;.i is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Landroidx/fragment/app/h;.a is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Landroidx/preference/b;.d is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Landroidx/preference/b;.e is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Landroidx/preference/b;.f is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Landroidx/preference/b;.g is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lcom/google/android/gms/internal/clearcut/y;.t is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lcom/google/android/gms/internal/firebase_auth/a;.t is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lcom/google/android/gms/internal/measurement/h1;.t is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lcom/google/android/material/floatingactionbutton/a;.a is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.a
   pk
W  Method Lcom/google/android/material/floatingactionbutton/a;.b is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.a
   pk
W  Method Lcom/google/android/play/core/internal/e0;.t is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lcom/google/crypto/tink/shaded/protobuf/t;.a is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lcom/google/crypto/tink/shaded/protobuf/t;.e is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lcom/google/crypto/tink/shaded/protobuf/t;.h is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lcom/google/crypto/tink/shaded/protobuf/t;.j is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lcom/google/crypto/tink/shaded/protobuf/t;.k is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lcom/google/crypto/tink/shaded/protobuf/t;.n is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lcom/google/crypto/tink/shaded/protobuf/t;.o is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lcom/google/crypto/tink/shaded/protobuf/t;.p is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lcom/google/crypto/tink/shaded/protobuf/t;.r is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lcom/google/crypto/tink/shaded/protobuf/t;.s is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lcom/google/crypto/tink/shaded/protobuf/t;.u is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lcom/google/crypto/tink/shaded/protobuf/t;.v is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lcom/google/crypto/tink/shaded/protobuf/y0;.a is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lcom/google/crypto/tink/shaded/protobuf/y0;.b is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lf/a/l/a/b;.b is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lf/q/b/a;.a is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lf/q/b/a;.b is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lf/q/b/a;.c is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lf/q/b/a;.d is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lf/q/b/a;.e is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lf/q/b/a;.g is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lf/q/b/a;.h is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lg/f/a/b/d/b/a;.F1 is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lg/f/a/b/d/f/s;.t is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lg/f/a/c/a0/d;.a is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lg/f/a/c/p/c;.a is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lg/f/a/c/p/c;.b is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lg/f/a/c/p/c;.c is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lg/f/a/c/p/c;.d is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lg/f/a/c/p/c;.e is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lg/f/a/c/p/c;.f is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lg/f/a/c/p/c;.g is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lg/f/a/c/p/c;.h is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lg/f/a/c/p/c;.i is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lg/f/a/c/p/c;.j is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lg/f/a/c/u/b;.a is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lg/f/a/c/u/b;.b is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lg/f/a/c/u/b;.c is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lg/f/a/c/u/b;.d is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lg/f/a/c/u/b;.e is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lcom/google/firebase/database/t/b;.c is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lcom/google/firebase/database/t/b;.d is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lcom/google/firebase/database/t/b;.e is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lcom/google/firebase/database/t/b;.f is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lcom/google/firebase/database/t/b;.h is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lf/q/a/b$b;.b is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lf/q/a/b$b;.c is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lf/q/a/b$b;.d is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk
W  Method Lkotlin/g0/o/c/l0/c/b/h;.a is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk!classes2.dex
W  Method Lkotlin/g0/o/c/l0/c/b/h;.b is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk!classes2.dex
W  Method Lkotlin/g0/o/c/l0/c/b/h;.c is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk!classes2.dex
W  Method Lkotlin/g0/o/c/l0/c/b/h;.d is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.apk!classes2.dex
W  Method Lkotlin/reflect/jvm/internal/impl/descriptors/c1/l;.g is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file /data/app/sg.ndi.sp-0nKvDXbFXEI7jLz0dKeugg==/base.ap
   k!classes2.dex

lceks171@ would it be possible for you to share a reproduction? The issue with abstract methods on non-abstract classes could very well be the same issue. The log from comment #1 also reveals a verification error, which is likely a different issue.

Yes that is the thing, i tried to create a sample project to reproduce the issue but i cannot seem to encounter the same issue.

my issue specifically is that i compiled my app with r8 version 1.6.89 on AGP 4.0, and i was able to get a response from my retrofit + okhttp + okio + moshi network call. Compiling the same code with r8 version 2.0.74 and above will seem to make my some of my network calls stuck at waiting for the response.

Is there a way to debug what r8 obfuscates or strips from the codebase between the 2 version of r8?

Would it be possible for you to share your Proguard configuration? You can dump all the Proguard configuration rules using the -printconfiguration rule.

In particular, I am wondering if you have an -assumenosideeffects rule that uses a wildcard *. If so, that could have unintended side effects such as marking the synchronization methods on java.lang.Object as not having side effects, because the wildcard is also applied to super classes.

Sure here is my config file.

Thanks for sharing the config. The issue you are seeing could very well be from this part:

# https://proandroiddev.com/is-your-kotlin-code-really-obfuscated-a36abf033dde
-assumenosideeffects class kotlin.jvm.internal.Intrinsics { *; }

Could you please try changing the above rule into the following (this is also the rule that is now suggested at https://proandroiddev.com/is-your-kotlin-code-really-obfuscated-a36abf033dde):

-assumenosideeffects class kotlin.jvm.internal.Intrinsics {
  public static void checkExpressionValueIsNotNull(java.lang.Object, java.lang.String);
  public static void checkFieldIsNotNull(java.lang.Object, java.lang.String);
  public static void checkFieldIsNotNull(java.lang.Object, java.lang.String, java.lang.String);
  public static void checkNotNull(java.lang.Object);
  public static void checkNotNull(java.lang.Object, java.lang.String);
  public static void checkNotNullExpressionValue(java.lang.Object, java.lang.String);
  public static void checkNotNullParameter(java.lang.Object, java.lang.String);
  public static void checkParameterIsNotNull(java.lang.Object, java.lang.String);
  public static void checkReturnedValueIsNotNull(java.lang.Object, java.lang.String);
  public static void checkReturnedValueIsNotNull(java.lang.Object, java.lang.String, java.lang.String);
  public static void throwUninitializedPropertyAccessException(java.lang.String);
}

Oh! the medium post updated. I tried the updated proguard rules and my network calls are working as expected. However i still see the logs in #3 though, can they safely be ignored?

Great, thanks for the confirmation! Yes, the logs in #3 can safely be ignored. We are planning to not emit any abstract methods on non-abstract classes in an upcoming version, which should eliminate these warnings. I will post an update here once that has landed.

Keeping this issue open as the verification error in comment #1 is still not fixed.

It is hard to provide source codes or input class files.

So, I'm trying to find which point has padding error. (source code is slightly changed, so, offset is moved )

$ dexdump -c classes3.dex
Processing 'classes3.dex'...
dexdump E 06-04 11:01:17 3412489 3412489 dexdump.cc:1884] Failure to verify dex file 'classes3.dex': Non-zero padding 3 before section of type 8195 at offset 0x602b48

$ dexdump -f -h -d -j classes3.dex
...
Class #9103            -
  Class descriptor  : 'Lk/a/d/c/i/d/b;'
  Access flags      : 0x0011 (PUBLIC FINAL)
  Superclass        : 'Ljava/lang/Object;'
  Interfaces        -
    #0              : 'Lk/a/d/c/i/d/a;'
...
  Direct methods    -
    #0              : (in Lk/a/d/c/i/d/b;)
      name          : '<init>'
      type          : '()V'
      access        : 0x10001 (PUBLIC CONSTRUCTOR)
      code          -
      registers     : 3
      ins           : 1
      outs          : 2
      insns size    : 25 16-bit code units
602b48:                                        |[602b48] k.a.d.c.i.d.b.<init>:()V
602b58: 7010 f54c 0200                         |0000: invoke-direct {v2}, Ljava/lang/Object;.<init>:()V // method@4cf5
602b5e: 2200 280e                              |0003: new-instance v0, Le8/s/k0; // type@0e28
602b62: 7010 044b 0000                         |0005: invoke-direct {v0}, Le8/s/k0;.<init>:()V // method@4b04

And I found k.a.d.c.i.d.b is obfuscated kotlin data class.
Should I check this class?

Could you try to build with compiler assertions enabled to check if that reveals anything?

You can build with assertions enabled by running JAVA_OPTS="-ea:com.android.tools.r8..." ./gradlew assembleRelease --info --no-daemon. When building with --info, you should see the log "Running R8 version X.Y.Z with assertions enabled." in the output. If you don't see the log above, you can try adding org.gradle.jvmargs=-ea:com.android.tools.r8... to gradle.properties.

Would it be possible for you to share classes3.dex (and possibly the source for k.a.d.c.i.d.b) privately with christofferqa@google.com or zerny@google.com?

I tried with -ea:com.android.tools.r8.dex... , but I got exception that seems not to be cause of this issue.
ex 1: https://r8.googlesource.com/r8/+/fca7b1c/src/main/java/com/android/tools/r8/shaking/ProguardConfigurationParser.java#939
ex 2: https://r8.googlesource.com/r8/+/fca7b1c/src/main/java/com/android/tools/r8/ir/optimize/CodeRewriter.java#1417

So, I changed option to -ea:com.android.tools.r8... -da:com.android.tools.r8.shaking.ProguardConfigurationParser -da:com.android.tools.r8.ir.optimize.CodeRewriter , and got following assertion.

https://r8.googlesource.com/r8/+/fca7b1c/src/main/java/com/android/tools/r8/dex/FileWriter.java#1291

Caused by: java.lang.AssertionError
	at com.android.tools.r8.dex.FileWriter$MixedSectionOffsets.setOffsetFor(FileWriter.java:1291)
	at com.android.tools.r8.dex.FileWriter$MixedSectionOffsets.setOffsetFor(FileWriter.java:1299)
	at com.android.tools.r8.dex.FileWriter.writeCodeItem(FileWriter.java:477)
	at java.util.ArrayList.forEach(ArrayList.java:1257)
	at com.android.tools.r8.dex.FileWriter.writeItems(FileWriter.java:376)
	at com.android.tools.r8.dex.FileWriter.generate(FileWriter.java:184)
	at com.android.tools.r8.dex.ApplicationWriter.writeDexFile(ApplicationWriter.java:600)
	at com.android.tools.r8.dex.ApplicationWriter.lambda$write$1(ApplicationWriter.java:291)

Also, I'll asking to company to share classes3.dex and source code with google.

Thanks for the additional information. The assertion error in comment #16 seems to suggest that the same code object is being written twice.

Could you please try to build with R8 7e3089abb4995d14a425d2d34a423eb4fe23380a with assertions enabled, and share the stack trace of the assertion error (in any)? You can build with this version of R8 by making the following changes to build.gradle:

buildscript {
    repositories {
        maven {
            url "https://storage.googleapis.com/r8-releases/raw/master"
        }
    }
    dependencies {
        classpath 'com.android.tools:r8:7e3089abb4995d14a425d2d34a423eb4fe23380a'  // Must be before the Gradle Plugin for Android.
        classpath 'com.android.tools.build:gradle:X.Y.Z'     // Your current AGP version.
     }
}

If you see a warning "Distributing classes using InheritanceClassInDexDistributor" or "Distributing classes using PackageSplitPopulator" it would also be useful to know which one.

I ran gradle with -ea:com.android.tools.r8.dex... jvm option.

And, after apply 7e3089abb4995d14a425d2d34a423eb4fe23380a, I can see many D8: Distributing classes using PackageSplitPopulator message whenever dex is processing.

And finally I got following assertion message.

Caused by: java.lang.AssertionError: Duplicate code object, current method: boolean com.xxxx.xxxx.xxxx(java.lang.String) (obsolete: false), existing: boolean com.xxxx.xxxx.xxxx(java.lang.String) (obsolete: false)
	at com.android.tools.r8.dex.FileWriter.lambda$sortDexCodesByClassName$1(FileWriter.java:337)
	at com.android.tools.r8.graph.DexClass.forEachMethod(DexClass.java:346)
	at com.android.tools.r8.dex.FileWriter.sortDexCodesByClassName(FileWriter.java:320)
	at com.android.tools.r8.dex.FileWriter.generate(FileWriter.java:171)
	at com.android.tools.r8.dex.ApplicationWriter.writeDexFile(ApplicationWriter.java:600)
	at com.android.tools.r8.dex.ApplicationWriter.lambda$write$1(ApplicationWriter.java:291)
	at java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask$AdaptedCallable.exec(ForkJoinTask.java:1424)
	at java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask.doExec(ForkJoinTask.java:289)

And this is from same source code location with issue b/157966650

Also, I tried to run with jvm option -ea:com.android.tools.r8... -da:com.android.tools.r8.shaking.ProguardConfigurationParser -da:com.android.tools.r8.ir.optimize.CodeRewriter , I found following assertion message.

https://r8.googlesource.com/r8/+/refs/heads/2.0/src/main/java/com/android/tools/r8/ir/optimize/staticizer/ClassStaticizerGraphLense.java#34

Caused by: java.lang.AssertionError
	at com.android.tools.r8.ir.optimize.staticizer.ClassStaticizerGraphLense.mapInvocationType(ClassStaticizerGraphLense.java:34)
	at com.android.tools.r8.graph.GraphLense$NestedGraphLense.lookupMethod(GraphLense.java:958)
	at com.android.tools.r8.graph.GraphLense$NestedGraphLense.lookupMethod(GraphLense.java:950)
	at com.android.tools.r8.ir.conversion.LensCodeRewriter.rewrite(LensCodeRewriter.java:168)
	at com.android.tools.r8.ir.conversion.IRConverter.optimize(IRConverter.java:1134)
	at com.android.tools.r8.ir.conversion.IRConverter.rewriteCodeInternal(IRConverter.java:1101)
	at com.android.tools.r8.ir.conversion.IRConverter.lambda$rewriteCode$12(IRConverter.java:1073)
	at com.android.tools.r8.utils.ExceptionUtils.withOriginAttachmentHandler(ExceptionUtils.java:141)
	at com.android.tools.r8.ir.conversion.IRConverter.rewriteCode(IRConverter.java:1069)
	at com.android.tools.r8.ir.conversion.IRConverter.processMethod(IRConverter.java:1051)
	at com.android.tools.r8.ir.conversion.IRConverter.lambda$processMethodsConcurrently$11(IRConverter.java:1026)
	at com.android.tools.r8.utils.ThreadUtils.lambda$processItems$0(ThreadUtils.java:25)
	at java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask$AdaptedCallable.exec(ForkJoinTask.java:1424)
	at java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask.doExec(ForkJoinTask.java:289)
	at java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool$WorkQueue.runTask(ForkJoinPool.java:1056)
	at java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool.runWorker(ForkJoinPool.java:1692)
	at java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinWorkerThread.run(ForkJoinWorkerThread.java:157)

And I'm trying to find what are newMethod and originalMethod.

newMethod and originalMethod are another one. And it is kotlin method of object such as

object Logger {
    fun logging(log: String) {
     }
}

And method does not have any reference of this(Logger), and third argument(Invoke.Type) is Type.STATIC

After added @Keep annotation on https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/157966650#comment13 method, it seems R8 can produce valid dex file.

And on device, dex file can be loaded by art runtime..

I added following proguard rule instead of @Keep annotation.

-keep,allowobfuscation,allowoptimization class com.xxx.xxx.XxxxManager {
    public static boolean verifySomeOfScheme(java.lang.String);

}

Only allowshrinking modifier added, same issue is raised, again.

I tried to extract program.jar and library.jar files from output of -Dcom.android.tools.r8.dumpinputtodirectory= option. If method is duplicated really, I might check method is duplicated on these jar files.

But I confirmed com.xxx.xxx.XxxxManager.verifySomeOfScheme is not duplicated on these jar files.

Thanks for sharing the results.

1. Just to be sure, is "boolean com.xxxx.xxxx.xxxx(java.lang.String)" and "boolean com.xxxx.xxxx.xxxx(java.lang.String)" the same method in the following assertion error that you shared?

   Caused by: java.lang.AssertionError: Duplicate code object, current method: boolean com.xxxx.xxxx.xxxx(java.lang.String) (obsolete: false), existing: boolean com.xxxx.xxxx.xxxx(java.lang.String) (obsolete: false)
   

   If so, would it be possible for you to check if they are identical by printing the result of method == seenCodes.get(code) in FileWriter#sortDexCodesByClassName()?

2. You shared that the assertion error was for the same source location as in b/157966650. So is it correct that "boolean com.xxxx.xxxx.xxxx(java.lang.String)" is the method boolean hasUrlScheme(java.lang.String)? In comment #25 it seems that you referred to the method as boolean verifySomeOfScheme(java.lang.String) -- did you mean boolean hasUrlScheme(java.lang.String) or what is the relation to this method?

3. Could you try to apply the patch at https://r8-review.googlesource.com/c/r8/+/52002 and rebuild with assertion errors? This will fail if there are duplicate methods prior to writing.

   If this fails, it would be interesting to hear the results of running with R8 version 2.1.35. This version should fail with an assertion error at the exact point in time where a duplicate method is introduced.

4. Would it be possible for you to share a small Android Studio project that reproduces the assertion error in ClassStaticizerGraphLense.mapInvocationType()? It might reproduce if you just move the overall structure of your Logger and use it in a similar way in a new project.

Thanks for your time, we appreciate your help in getting to the bottom of this issue!

A bit of analysis for future reference:

It is somewhat interesting that the newly introduced assertion that calls verifyCodeObjectsOwners() does not fail prior to writing (https://r8-review.googlesource.com/c/r8/+/51981/7/src/main/java/com/android/tools/r8/R8.java#788). This suggests that there are no two methods with the same code object prior to writing. There could still be two methods with the same signature but different code objects. It would be good to rule out that this is not the case, hence the suggestion to build with https://r8-review.googlesource.com/c/r8/+/52002 above.

The fact that the assertion error at https://r8-review.googlesource.com/c/r8/+/51981/7/src/main/java/com/android/tools/r8/dex/FileWriter.java#319 does not fail should rule out the possibility that mapping.getClasses() contains the same class twice. Thus it seems that there are two methods that have the same code object at this point, or that MethodToCodeObjectMapping maps two different methods with different code objects to the same code object. MethodToCodeObjectMapping$MapBacking uses an IdentityHashMap<DexEncodedMethod, DexCode> so even if there were two different methods with the same signature but different code objects we should not be mapping them to the same code object as a result of a collision (this could happen with an IdentityHashMap<DexMethod, DexCode>).

Reply for Comment #27

1. ~ I tried to check again with Android Studio Evaluat Window (on Debugger), and method == seenCodes.get(code) is true (same instance). ~
   I got mistake. identical by printing the result are Caused by: java.lang.AssertionError: Duplicate code object, current method: boolean com.xxxx.xxxx.xxxx(java.lang.String) (obsolete: false), existing: boolean com.xxxx.xxxx$SingletonHolder.xxxx(java.lang.String) (obsolete: false)

2. With https://r8-review.googlesource.com/c/r8/+/52002 , assert is raised on https://r8.googlesource.com/r8/+/d3b6c98c6f2947a777d283234c9e3beb2dc6d785/src/main/java/com/android/tools/r8/graph/DirectMappedDexApplication.java#188

From this line, method.toSourceString() points boolean com.xxxx.xxxx.xxxx(java.lang.String). But otherMethod.toSourceString() points boolean com.xxxx.xxxx$SingletonHolder.xxxx(java.lang.String) that is not in source code.

Actually, com.xxxx.xxxx class implementation is

public class xxxx {
    private xxxx() {}
    private static class SingletonHolder {
        public static final xxxx instance = new xxxx();
    }
    public static xxxx getInstance() {
        return SingletoneHolder.instance;
    }

    public void doSomething() {
         String value = someclass.getStringValue();
         if (!xxxx(value)) return;  # static method is calling
         doOtherSomething();
    }
    public static boolean xxxx(String value) {
         return value.startsWith(SOME_PATTERN);
    }
}

It seems R8 generated boolean com.xxxx.xxxx$SingletonHolder.xxxx(java.lang.String) method while optimize it.

I tried to make simple project with above class, but project did not raise assertion.

Thanks for the information, this was super helpful.

Could you try to patch in https://r8-review.googlesource.com/c/r8/+/52043, and change "com.xxxx.xxxx" to its original name in ClassStaticizer.java, and check if that fixes the build?

I will try to review the optimization step-by-step with the structure you pasted, so that we can hopefully come up with a reproduction of this problem.

Sorry, could you also try to build with R8 version 2.1.38 and assertions enabled? With R8 2.1, the build should fail with an assertion error as soon as a duplicate method is introduced, so I am wondering if this would fail with an exception in ClassStaticizer.java or StaticizingProcessor.java.

You can build with 2.1.38 by making the following changes to build.gradle:

buildscript {
    repositories {
        maven {
            url 'https://storage.googleapis.com/r8-releases/raw'
        }
    }
    dependencies {
        classpath 'com.android.tools:r8:2.1.38'          // Must be before the Gradle Plugin for Android.
        classpath 'com.android.tools.build:gradle:X.Y.Z' // Your current AGP version.
     }
}

Also, a bug in the class staticizer was fixed in R8 version 2.0.82, so it would also be interesting to hear if this fixes your issue.

Thanks!

Reply for Comment #30

There is no assertion with -ea:com.android.tools.r8.dex... option from https://r8-review.googlesource.com/c/r8/+/52043 , and there is no padding error on dex files.

Reply for Comment #31

I tried to build with R8 2.0.82 and 2.1.38, but it still raise same AssertionError with Comment #16.

So, I tried merge https://r8-review.googlesource.com/c/r8/+/52002 on R8 2.0.82, and I got same AssertionError with Comment #29

It seems R8 still generated boolean com.xxxx.xxxx$SingletonHolder.xxxx(java.lang.String) method and put it in IdentityHashMap on R8 2.0.82 and 2.1.38.

It seems there is no assertion with -ea:com.android.tools.r8.dex... option on R8 2.0.84.

I'm sorry for my mistake.
I found I did not revert proguard rule that mentioned at Comment #25

ganadist@, I lost track a bit - do you see the assertion on R8 2.0.84 with https://r8-review.googlesource.com/c/r8/+/52043 patched in after removing the keep rule? Or is https://r8-review.googlesource.com/c/r8/+/52043 fixing your issue across 2.0.82 and 2.1.38 permanently?

Additionally, is the method defined as a static member on a kotlin companion class or on a nested class (if plain java)?

I misunderstood that https://r8-review.googlesource.com/c/r8/+/52080 fixed this issue.

So I tried to test R8 2.0.84 without https://r8-review.googlesource.com/c/r8/+/52043

Should I test with R8 2.0.84 with https://r8-review.googlesource.com/c/r8/+/52043 ?

Also I tested R8 2.0.82 + https://r8-review.googlesource.com/c/r8/+/52043 and it was okay,
but not tested R8 2.1.38 + https://r8-review.googlesource.com/c/r8/+/52043 , yet.
Do you need result of them?

And duplicated method by R8 is plain java static method

    public static boolean xxxx(String value) {
         return value.startsWith(SOME_PATTERN);
    }

in Comment #29

Thank you for the last part, I was able to make a local reproduction of the issue.

I can confirm R8 2.0.88 fixed this issue, and all dex file can be verified on ART or dexdump.
Thank you very much!.

Thank you for the quick confirmation. Will mark this as fixed when rolled into studio/agp for an upcoming release.

In my app compiled with stock R8 bundled with AS 4.0.1, I was getting a lot of these "Method ... is abstract, but the declaring class is neither abstract nor an interface in dex file..." warning messages in logcat, which led me to this bug report. But I had no crashes though, unlike OP. Should I worry about these or are they benign ? These warnings are still shown in all 2.0.x versions (tested 2.0.100), and interestingly are not there anymore with 2.1.42 referenced in a commit above. Is it expected ? I expected these warnings to not be shown starting with v2.0.88.