review for 7086585: make Java field injection more flexible

[Vladimir Kozlov]

 > I'm not sure how to factor that in a way that would improve it much.  Any 
suggestions?

I mostly worry if later we try to do the same initialization in an other place 
we will forgot to update some values. So it would be nice to do it by just 
calling one method:

RawFieldDescriptor::init(u2 access_flags,
                          u2 name_index,
                          u2 signature_index,
                          u2 initval_index,
                          u2 generic_signature_index,
                          u4 offset) {
   _shorts[access_flags_offset] = access_flags;
   _shorts[name_index_offset] = name_index;
   _shorts[signature_index_offset] = signature_index;
   _shorts[initval_index_offset] = initval_index;
   _shorts[generic_signature_offset] = generic_signature_index;
   set_offset(offset);
}

Vladimir

Tom Rodriguez wrote:
> On Sep 8, 2011, at 6:56 PM, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
> 
>> Thank you, Tom
>>
>> Very nice cleanup.
> 
> Thanks.  I think there's another possible round of this to simplify the field layout and javaClasses some more but I didn't want to tangle it up with the injection changes.
> 
>> classFileParser.cpp:
>>
>> Can we use an arrays instead of switch to map type to allocation type in FieldAllocationCount::update()?
> 
> I considered doing that.  I'll go ahead and add it.
> 
>> Can we factor out next sequence since it is used in two places?:
>>
>> +    RawFieldDescriptor* field = RawFieldDescriptor::from_field_array(fields(), n);
>> +    field->set_access_flags(access_flags.as_short());
>> +    field->set_name_index(name_index);
>> +    field->set_signature_index(signature_index);
>> +    field->set_initval_index(constantvalue_index);
>> +    field->set_generic_signature_index(generic_signature_index);
> 
> I'm not sure how to factor that in a way that would improve it much.  Any suggestions?
> 
> tom
> 
>> Thanks,
>> Vladimir
>>
>> Tom Rodriguez wrote:
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~never/7086585
>>> 1577 lines changed: 621 ins; 612 del; 344 mod; 65541 unchg
>>> 7086585: make Java field injection more flexible
>>> Reviewed-by:
>>> Classes which are special to the JVM often need fields for the VM's
>>> use.  Currently the mechanism for this is adhoc or relies on the Java
>>> code declaring the needed fields.  We need a mechanism for flexibly
>>> injecting needed fields.  The basic idea is to built a standard
>>> mechanism for declaring injected fields and to inject them during
>>> class file parsing so that they get laid out and tracked like normal
>>> fields.  This is also means that they can simply be looked up when CDS
>>> is used so we don't have to rely on hardcoding them.  To do this I
>>> hide the encoding of the fields array and replaced all existing
>>> iteration with a new set of *FieldStream classes.  JavaFieldStream
>>> only iterates true Java fields so the behavious of existing code is
>>> completely unchanged.
>>> The new fields use a special access flag JVM_ACC_INTERNAL to describe
>>> themselves and instead of having the name_index and signature_index
>>> refer to the constant pool they are vmSymbols::SID so they are looked
>>> up directly from the vmSymbols.  All of this is hidden inside the
>>> RawFieldDescriptor class which is responsible for decoding fields from
>>> the field array.
>>> I also cleaned up the field layout code a bit.  I eliminated the
>>> _ALIGNED_ AllocationType since there's no longer any difference in how
>>> we align double word types.  I turned FieldAllocationCount into a real
>>> class and moved some of the layout code into it.
>>> I deleted the nonexistent MethodHandle::vmslot field.  I moved
>>> ClassLoader::parallelCapable into java_lang_ClassLoader.  I deleted
>>> some dead field injection like the Reference.discovered field which
>>> has existed since 1.5, and the existing logic for java.lang.Class
>>> fields since it now uses the field injection machinery.
>>> Tested with runthese, the sajdi tests, the tmtools suite, the nsk
>>> regression, jdb, jdi, jvmti, hprof and jit subsuites along with
>>> vm/mlvm, but with and without the JDK changes that remove these fields
>>> and rely on injection to introduce them.  They will be removed under
>>> 7088481 and those changes are http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~never/7088481.
>