Request for review 8007320: NPG: move method annotations

Coleen Phillimore coleen.phillimore at oracle.com
Mon Feb 4 17:08:43 PST 2013


On 2/2/2013 12:05 AM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
> > open webrev at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8007320/
>
> agent/src/share/classes/sun/jvm/hotspot/oops/ConstMethod.java
>     line 435: return (getSize() * wordSize) - (offset * wordSize) - 2;
>         Should that literal '2' be something like sizeof(short)? I see
>         bunch of other literal '2's in near by code so looks like that
>         is probably the style for this code.

Yes, it's backing up to sizeof(short) in all these cases.   I don't know 
if I should just change this one without changing the others and I don't 
want to change too much in SA.

>
> src/share/vm/classfile/classFileParser.cpp
>     line 1872: void ClassFileParser::copy_localvariable_table(
>         I wasn't expecting LVT work with this bug report. I think Serguei
>         was the last person to do work on LVT/LVTT stuff so you'll want
>         to make sure he gets a look at this new code.

I did slip in a refactoring here because I kept losing the my way to the 
end of parse_method() where the annotation code was, and this was easily 
separable.  I only moved this code to it's own function.   I only made 
two minor modifications to get the constants from the ConstMethod passed in.

>
>     nit line 1893:  if (LVT_put_after_lookup(lvt, lvt_Hash) == false
>     nit line 1894:    && _need_verify
>     nit line 1895:    && _major_version >= JAVA_1_5_VERSION ) {
>         Usually, a continued if-statement lines up just inside
>         the 'if (' like this:
>     nit line 1893:  if (LVT_put_after_lookup(lvt, lvt_Hash) == false
> nit line 1894:      && _need_verify

I will reformat this as I've already moved this code.  I probably missed 
reindenting the if clauses.  I like the && || expressions at the end but 
I don't think we have a coding standard for that.

>
>
>     old line 4047:  host_klass,
>     new line 4073:  !host_klass.is_null(),
>        The above changed in a call to 
> InstanceKlass::allocate_instance_klass()
>        but the reason isn't obvious yet.

Passing a boolean seemed more consistent, so I changed it.
>
>        Update: OK, the changes in instanceKlass.cpp make things more 
> clear.
>
> src/share/vm/classfile/classFileParser.hpp
>     No comments.
>
> src/share/vm/classfile/defaultMethods.cpp
>     old line 1150:   Method* m = 
> Method::allocate(cp->pool_holder()->class_loader_data(),
>     old line 1151:                                code_length, flags, 
> 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
>
>     new line 1149:   InlineTableSizes sizes;
>     new line 1151:   Method* m = 
> Method::allocate(cp->pool_holder()->class_loader_data(),
>     new line 1152:                                code_length, flags, 
> &sizes,
>         In the old code, zero's were passed in. In the new code, "sizes"
>         is uninitialized. Is that OK? See comments in constMethod.cpp 
> below.

Sizes are initialized to zero by the macro.
>
>         Does line 1149 need to be: "InlineTableSizes sizes();" in 
> order to
>         get the default constructor stuff to work? Sorry, my C++ 
> constructor
>         memory is faulty... :-)

No, it should call the default constructor without ().   I'll double 
check, now you have me worried about my memory.
>
> src/share/vm/oops/annotations.cpp
>     No comments.
>
> src/share/vm/oops/annotations.hpp
>     No comments.
>
> src/share/vm/oops/constMethod.cpp
>     line 36: ConstMethod* ConstMethod::allocate(ClassLoaderData* 
> loader_data,
>     line 37:                                    int byte_code_size,
>     line 38:                                    InlineTableSizes* sizes,
>     line 41:   int size = ConstMethod::size(byte_code_size, sizes);
>         The old call to Method::allocate() in defaultMethods.cpp 
> passed zeros.
>         The new call to Method::allocate() in defaultMethods.cpp passes a
>         'sizes' obj, but I don't think it is initialized.
>
>         It looks like ConstMethod::size() is using the 'sizes' object
>         that was passed in.
>

Same, will double check the constructor that zeros it is called.
>
> src/share/vm/oops/constMethod.hpp
>     nit lines 139-148: indent appears to be 3
>     nit lines 157-159: indent appears to be 3
>     nit lines 161-172: indent appears to be 3, and multiples of 3

You are right.  I fixed them.
>
>     lines 190-200: Thanks for switching to HEX; easier for my brain 
> anyway.

My brain greatly prefers:

u2
     _has_linenumber_table : 1,
     _has_checked_exceptions : 1,
     _has_localvariable_table : 1,
     _has_exception_table : 1,
     _has_generic_signature : 1,
     _has_method_parameters : 1,
     _is_overpass : 1,
     _has_method_annotations : 1,
     _has_parameter_annotations : 1,
     _has_type_annotations : 1,
     _has_default_annotations : 1,
                                                   : 5;   // flags left

And let the compilers do bit manipulation like they've been doing for 
years, but the duplication of this code can't be coded in the 
serviceability agent.

>
> src/share/vm/oops/instanceKlass.cpp
>     No comments.
>
> src/share/vm/oops/instanceKlass.hpp
>     No comments.
>
> src/share/vm/oops/method.cpp
>     new line 1021:     InlineTableSizes sizes;
>     new line 1022:     Method* m_oop = Method::allocate(loader_data, 0,
>     new line 1023: accessFlags_from(flags_bits), &sizes,
>         The "sizes" object appears to be uninitialized.
>
>         Does line 1021 need to be: "InlineTableSizes sizes();" in 
> order to
>         get the default constructor stuff to work?

Ditto above comment.
>
> src/share/vm/oops/method.hpp
>     No comments.
>
> src/share/vm/prims/jvm.cpp
>     No comments.
>
> src/share/vm/prims/jvmtiRedefineClasses.cpp
>     No comments. I was going to ask about the removal of the tracing
>     of the various annotations lengths, but I think they're all the
>     same size as the methods() array now.

Yes, that traced length is always the same as the methods->length().   
The function rewrite_cp_refs_in_annotations_typeArray prints the lengths 
of the annotations.

1621   RC_TRACE_WITH_THREAD(0x02000000, THREAD,
1622     ("num_annotations=%d", num_annotations));

>
>
> src/share/vm/prims/jvmtiRedefineClasses.hpp
>     No comments.
>
> src/share/vm/runtime/fieldDescriptor.cpp
>     No comments.
>
> src/share/vm/runtime/vmStructs.cpp
>     No comments.
>

thanks!
Coleen

> Dan
>
>
> On 1/31/13 3:12 PM, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
>> Summary: allocate method annotations and attach to ConstMethod if 
>> present
>>
>> From the bug report:
>>
>> This is related to 8003419. The annotations are allocated in 
>> Metaspace during class file parsing and pointers to them are carried 
>> around through the parser. In order to clean these up, you'd have to 
>> collect these pointers somewhere so they can be cleaned up if the 
>> parse fails.
>>
>> Instead, attach method annotations to the constMethod so that they 
>> can be cleaned up if the ConstMethod has to be cleaned up.
>>
>> If any annotations exists for any method, an Array<u1> is created for 
>> that method, but it's put into an Array<Array<u1>*> (an array of 
>> these arrays) where there's an entry for each method in the klass, so 
>> the other methods would have a pointer allocated for it whether 
>> needed or not. There are 3 of these array of arrays in the type 
>> Annotations, and an Annotations* object for type annotations, which 
>> are so far created infrequently.
>>
>> The fix is to move the 4 types of method annotations to embedded 
>> pointers in the ConstMethod if they are needed and add a flag to 
>> indicate whether they are present. You could embed the annotations 
>> directly, but the length has to be pulled out as an 'int' from 
>> unaligned storage, and the bit math is getting to be too fragile 
>> without a redesign.
>>
>> Also, some code was refactored in parse_method() and the code that 
>> sorted annotation arrays to match sorted method arrays isn't needed 
>> anymore.  This is in a couple of places, including defaultMethods and 
>> RedefineClasses.
>>
>> The real purpose of this change is to make the annotations allocated 
>> in Metaspace easier to clean up if class file parsing fails, but 
>> hopefully has some cleanup and space saving benefits as well.
>>
>> open webrev at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8007320/
>> bug link at http://bugs.sun.com/view_bug.do?bug_id=8007320 (just 
>> filed it so might not be available yet)
>>
>>
>> Tested with serviceability tests (nsk.sajdi.testlist, 
>> vm.tmtools.testlist),  jtreg tests for annotations, including the new 
>> type annotation tests, jtreg tests for java/lang/instrument, 
>> nsk.parallel_class_loading.testlist and vm.quick.testlist (which is 
>> the same as full).
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Coleen
>



More information about the hotspot-runtime-dev mailing list