Request for Review JDK-8006948: Update javac for MethodParameters format change

[Kumar Srinivasan]

On 1/25/2013 11:31 AM, Eric McCorkle wrote:
> On 01/25/13 13:54, Kumar Srinivasan wrote:
>>> On 01/25/13 13:32, Kumar Srinivasan wrote:
>>>> Eric,
>>>>
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> Please review this change, which updates javac and the classfile
>>>>> library
>>>>> to reflect changes in the class file format of MethodParameters
>>>>> attributes.
>>>> What was the reason to make this change ?
>>> It was decided that the SYNTHESIZED flag would be 0x8000, not 0x10000 as
>>> it was in a previous version of the spec.  Therefore, there is no reason
>>> for the flags field to be u4.
>> Right I read the discussions on the rationale now.
>>> It bears mention that the u4 causes alignment trap issues if not handled
>>> carefully.
>>>
>>>> Not  true, this will break pack200. and there are  tests in place for
>>>> this.
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ksrini/8005252/webrev.1/
>>>>
>>> What would it take to update these tests accordingly?  I assume they are
>>> in TL, and thus can be addressed with a follow-up?
>> Yes.
>>
> Honestly, the pack200 tests for this should be disabled for now.  The
> *unit* tests aren't enabled at this point, because the implementation is
> under active testing and modification.
>
> Should I include something in this patch to disable the test, or should
> it be done in a separate changeset?

I think what needs to happen is this:

1. run all the pack200 tests in jdk/test/tools/pack200

2. compare the failures to what has already been disabled

3. if there are new ones file a bug against pack200: 
core-libs/java.util.jar
(assign it to me or you if you want to handle this, the changes are 
trivial but busy work)

4. add the new test lines in #3 to jdk/test/ProblemList.txt, after a 
line describing the  bug
     which will ultimately address it, you can see the existing pattern.

5. get this update to ProblemList.txt  reviewed on core-libs using JBS 
id: JDK-8006948,
I will approve it.

Thanks

Kumar