The s.m.Unsafe representation in hotspot and method registration

[Joel Borggrén-Franck]

Hi Paul,

I would guess this is because of the HSX model where we could use the same VM with different majors of the JDK. Would that make sense?

cheers
/Joel

On 24 Mar 2014, at 17:42, Paul Sandoz <paul.sandoz at oracle.com> wrote:

> I started working on a patch to remove the monitor related methods on Unsafe, and was thinking this is gonna be easy, it kind of is, but there is some curious code for the registration of the native methods:
> 
>  http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/hotspot/file/tip/src/share/vm/prims/unsafe.cpp#l1685
> 
> JVM_ENTRY(void, JVM_RegisterUnsafeMethods(JNIEnv *env, jclass unsafecls))
>  UnsafeWrapper("JVM_RegisterUnsafeMethods");
>  {
>    ThreadToNativeFromVM ttnfv(thread);
> 
>    // Unsafe methods
>    {
>      bool success = false;
>      // We need to register the 1.6 methods first because the 1.8 methods would register fine on 1.7 and 1.6
>      if (!success) {
>        success = register_natives("1.6 methods",   env, unsafecls, methods_16,  sizeof(methods_16)/sizeof(JNINativeMethod));
>      }
>      if (!success) {
>        success = register_natives("1.8 methods",   env, unsafecls, methods_18,  sizeof(methods_18)/sizeof(JNINativeMethod));
>      }
>      if (!success) {
>        success = register_natives("1.5 methods",   env, unsafecls, methods_15,  sizeof(methods_15)/sizeof(JNINativeMethod));
>      }
>      if (!success) {
>        success = register_natives("1.4.1 methods", env, unsafecls, methods_141, sizeof(methods_141)/sizeof(JNINativeMethod));
>      }
>      if (!success) {
>        success = register_natives("1.4.0 methods", env, unsafecls, methods_140, sizeof(methods_140)/sizeof(JNINativeMethod));
>      }
>      guarantee(success, "register unsafe natives");
>    }
> 
> 
> And there are multiple declarations of the same methods in various arrays. What is the rational for this kind of registration?
> 
> I presume when removing methods one removes entries from all arrays?
> 
> --
> 
> One a separate note i think we can also remove all methods marked with @Deprecated (which according to the comments were done so in 1.4.1).
> 
> Paul.
> 
> 
>