RFR: 8376295: "assert(BytecodeVerificationRemote) failed: Should not be here" when running class redefinition test with -XX:-BytecodeVerificationRemote

[Leonid Mesnik]

On Thu, 29 Jan 2026 02:30:19 GMT, David Holmes <dholmes at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Hi
>> 
>> Please review following fix that remove incorrect assertion.
>> 
>> Verification should be always done for redefined classes, and is called 
>> `bool Verifier::verify(InstanceKlass* klass, bool should_verify_class, TRAPS)`
>> where `should_verify_class` and `is_eligible_for_verification` define if verification should be done or not.
>> Thus, seems it doesn't make a sense to check `BytecodeVerificationRemote` during verification.
>> 
>> Verified that class redefinition tests pass now with TEST_VM_OPTS="-XX:-BytecodeVerificationRemote" and fastdebug
>
> src/hotspot/share/classfile/verifier.cpp line 625:
> 
>> 623: 
>> 624:   // Either verifying both local and remote classes or just remote classes.
>> 625:   assert(BytecodeVerificationRemote, "Should not be here");
> 
> Rather than deleting the assertion can we expand it:
> 
> assert(BytecodeVerificationRemote || _klass->should_verify_class(), "Should not be here");
> 
> ?

The  
`_klass->should_verify_class()`
 is false when class is redefined. 
The '_klass' in fresh "scratch class".  So the  `bool Verifier::verify(InstanceKlass* klass, bool should_verify_class)`  is called for "scratch_class"  with  `should_verify_class = true`. 
The `should_verify_class = true` is needed because it is not possible to just call 
`scratch_class->set_should_verify_class(true);` 
in the safepoint. 

The stacktrace:
 ClassVerifier::verify_class(JavaThread* (verifier.cpp:625)
Verifier::verify(InstanceKlass*, bool`should_verify_class = true`  , JavaThread*) (verifier.cpp:223)
 VM_RedefineClasses::load_new_class_versions()  (jvmtiRedefineClasses.cpp:1459)
 VM_RedefineClasses::doit_prologue() (jvmtiRedefineClasses.cpp:1334)
VMThread::execute(VM_Operation*) (vmThread.cpp:541)
JvmtiEnv::RedefineClasses(int, jvmtiClassDefinition const*)+0x18a (jvmtiEnv.cpp:505)

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/29476#discussion_r2740235533