[10] JBS: 8167408: Invalid critical JNI function lookup

[Vladimir Ivanov]

Looks good.

Best regards,
Vladimir Ivanov

On 11/3/17 6:06 PM, jamsheed wrote:
> Hi Dean, David, Martin, Vladimir,
> 
> incorporated most of the suggestions, let me know if this is ok!
> 
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.02/
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Jamsheed
> 
> On Wednesday 01 November 2017 03:58 AM, Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
>> Jamsheed, nice test!
>>
>> 2 suggestions:
>>
>>   (1) Enable the test on all platforms: though the bug is 
>> platform-specific, it doesn't mean the test should be. I don't see any 
>> platform-specific code there and it's beneficial to test other 
>> platforms as well
>>
>>   (2) Add some test cases with multiple array parameters.
>>
>> Otherwise, looks good.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Vladimir Ivanov
>>
>> On 10/31/17 10:37 PM, jamsheed wrote:
>>> Hi Dean,
>>>
>>> Thank you for the review,
>>>
>>> tested with a test case, previously it was not working for 
>>> windows-x86, now it works.
>>>
>>> revised webrev with test 
>>> case:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.01/
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Jamsheed
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tuesday 31 October 2017 02:18 AM, dean.long at oracle.com wrote:
>>>> I think you need a native test for Windows x86 that defines 
>>>> JavaCritical methods with various signatures (especially arrays) to 
>>>> make sure this is working correctly.
>>>>
>>>> dl
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 10/30/17 9:45 AM, jamsheed wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> request for review,
>>>>>
>>>>> jbs : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167408
>>>>>
>>>>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.00/
>>>>>
>>>>> (contributed by Ioannis Tsakpinis)
>>>>>
>>>>> desc:
>>>>>
>>>>> -- it starts with JavaCritical_ instead of Java_;
>>>>> -- it does not have extra JNIEnv* and jclass arguments;
>>>>> -- Java arrays are passed in two arguments: the first is an array 
>>>>> length, and the second is a pointer to raw array data. That is, no 
>>>>> need to call GetArrayElements and friends, you can instantly use a 
>>>>> direct array pointer.
>>>>>
>>>>> updated arg_size calculation wrt above points.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Jamsheed
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>