RFR(xs): 8196920: VerifierTest_1A.java and VerifierTest_1B.java fail: assert(receiver_klass->is_subtype_of(static_receiver_klass))

[Ioi Lam]

There is one set of braces for each method. This is pretty common in the 
HotSpot tests. E.g.

http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/hs/file/e0d3be81da47/test/hotspot/jtreg/runtime/BootstrapMethod/BSMCalledTwice.java#l128

So we should leave the braces and indentation as is.

Thanks

- Ioi



On 2/13/18 7:21 PM, David Holmes wrote:
> On 14/02/2018 12:19 PM, Calvin Cheung wrote:
>> On 2/13/18, 5:48 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>> Hi Calvin,
>>>
>>> Changes look good to me.
>> Thanks for your review, David.
>>>
>>> Aside: why does this test have unnecessary {} scopes ??
>> Not sure since I didn't write the original test. Perhaps they're 
>> there for better code readability?
>> I can replace them with blank lines like the following:
>>>         cw.visit(V1_8, ACC_ABSTRACT + ACC_INTERFACE, 
>>> "UnverifiableIntf", null, "java/lang/Object", null);
>>>
>>>             fv = cw.visitField(ACC_PUBLIC + ACC_FINAL + ACC_STATIC, 
>>> "x", "LVerifierTest0;", null, null);
>>>             fv.visitEnd();
>>>
>>>             mv = cw.visitMethod(ACC_STATIC, "<clinit>", "()V", null, 
>>> null);
>>>             mv.visitCode();
>>>             mv.visitTypeInsn(NEW, "VerifierTest0");
>>>             mv.visitInsn(DUP);
>>>             mv.visitMethodInsn(INVOKESPECIAL, "VerifierTest0", 
>>> "<init>", "()V", false);
>>>             mv.visitFieldInsn(PUTSTATIC, "UnverifiableIntf", "x", 
>>> "LVerifierTest0;");
>>>             mv.visitInsn(RETURN);
>>>             mv.visitMaxs(2, 0);
>>>             mv.visitEnd();
>>>
>>>         addBadMethod(cw);
>>>         cw.visitEnd();
>> Do you prefer the above?
>
> Sure - with indent fixed too of course. :)
>
> But don't waste too much time on it.
>
> Thanks,
> David
>
>> thanks,
>> Calvin
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> David
>>>
>>> On 14/02/2018 9:23 AM, Calvin Cheung wrote:
>>>> JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8196920
>>>> (sorry, the bug was marked confidential)
>>>>
>>>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ccheung/8196920/webrev.00/
>>>> (the above change was suggested by Ioi)
>>>>
>>>> By design, the test created a unverifiable class:
>>>>
>>>> Expected exception:
>>>> java.lang.VerifyError: Call to wrong <init> method
>>>> Exception Details:
>>>>    Location:
>>>>      UnverifiableBase.<clinit>()V @4: invokespecial
>>>>    Reason:
>>>>      Type 'java/lang/Object' (constant pool 4) is not assignable to 
>>>> 'VerifierTest0' (constant pool 14)
>>>>
>>>> Due to some recent changes, the test doesn't work with the 
>>>> following vm options combination in hs-tier4 testing:
>>>> -Xcomp -XX:-TieredCompilation -Xverify:none
>>>> and resulting in assert in sharedRuntime.cpp:
>>>> assert(receiver_klass->is_subtype_of(static_receiver_klass)) 
>>>> failed: actual receiver must be subclass of static receiver klass
>>>>
>>>> A fix is to replace the above with a "bad" method which will never 
>>>> be executed during runtime:
>>>>
>>>> Expected exception:
>>>> java.lang.VerifyError: Operand stack underflow
>>>> Exception Details:
>>>>    Location:
>>>>      UnverifiableBase.bad()V @0: areturn
>>>>    Reason:
>>>>      Attempt to pop empty stack.
>>>>
>>>> thanks,
>>>> Calvin