[9] RFR: 8152207: Perform array bound checks while getting a length of bytecode instructions

[Jiangli Zhou]

+1

Thanks,
Jiangli

> On May 26, 2016, at 10:36 AM, harold seigel <harold.seigel at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Artem,
> 
> The hotspot changes look good.
> 
> For the jdk webrev, can you move the new code at lines 1699 and 1700 to just inside the 'default:' alternative?
> 
> Thanks, Harold
> 
> 
> On 5/20/2016 4:05 PM, Artem Smotrakov wrote:
>> Hello,
>> 
>> Could someone review this fix, please?
>> 
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asmotrak/8152207/hotspot/webrev.01/
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asmotrak/8152207/jdk/webrev.00/
>> 
>> Artem
>> 
>> On 05/10/2016 01:49 PM, Artem Smotrakov wrote:
>>> Hi Christian,
>>> 
>>> Thank you for review. Here is updated webrev
>>> 
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asmotrak/8152207/hotspot/webrev.01/
>>> 
>>> Artem
>>> 
>>> On 05/09/2016 01:24 PM, Christian Thalinger wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On May 4, 2016, at 1:48 PM, Artem Smotrakov <artem.smotrakov at oracle.com <mailto:artem.smotrakov at oracle.com>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Please review two small patches for jdk and hotspot repos which add array bound checks to functions which return a length of bytecode instruction.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Please see details in https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8152207
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asmotrak/8152207/jdk/webrev.00/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Easmotrak/8152207/jdk/webrev.00/>
>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asmotrak/8152207/hotspot/webrev.00/
>>>> 
>>>> static bool        is_defined     (int  code)    { return 0 <= code && code < number_of_codes && flags(code, false) != 0; }
>>>> + static int length_for (Code code) { return 0 <= code && code < number_of_codes ? _lengths[code] & 0xF : -1; }
>>>> + static int wide_length_for(Code code) { return 0 <= code && code < number_of_codes ? _lengths[code] >> 4 : -1; }
>>>> You should factor the bound check into a separate method.
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Artem
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>