RFR 8030633: nsk/jvmti/RedefineClasses/StressRedefine failed invalid method ordering, length on Solaris

[Dmitry Samersoff]

Coleen,

Looks good for me.

Few cosmetic nits to mention:

defaultMethods.cpp:

ll.1042. 1052

It might be more readable if we replace
klass->methods()->length() to original_methods->length();

ll. 1054

It might be good to call
sort(new_methods) only if (new_methods->length() > 0)

-Dmitry


On 2013-12-19 22:59, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
> 
> On 12/19/2013 12:42 PM, Karen Kinnear wrote:
>> Coleen,
>>
>> Code looks good.
>> In particular I was checking we handle both the null and
>> empty_int_array cases - I assume
>> that we need to handle both due to bootstrapping issues.
> 
> The original method array is the_empty_int_array() and not null but I
> added null checks in it because Dan had the same comment too.
> 
> See:
> 
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8030633_2/
> 
> Thanks,
> Coleen
> 
>>
>> thanks,
>> Karen
>>
>> On Dec 19, 2013, at 11:40 AM, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
>>
>>> Summary: A method with no declared methods was getting an AME
>>> overpass method with the latest change.  The method_ordering array
>>> was not updated for the new methods.
>>>
>>> open webrev at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8030633/
>>> bug link https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8030633
>>>
>>> Tested with existing tests
>>> nsk/jvmti/RedefineClasses/StressRedefine{WithoutBytecodeCorruption}.
>>> Needs native code to create new test in jtreg, so I didn't add one.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Coleen
> 


-- 
Dmitry Samersoff
Oracle Java development team, Saint Petersburg, Russia
* I would love to change the world, but they won't give me the sources.