Review request for the incorrect check for "getClassLoader" permission

[David Holmes]

On 27/06/2012 8:15 PM, Mandy Chung wrote:
> David,
>
> On 6/25/2012 10:02 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>
>> I think it is not unreasonable that our jigsaw sources and jsr166e
>> sources will naturally diverge for a while. This shouldn't be seen as
>> a "bad thing". We want to modularize as much as we can to gain
>> experience with the new architecture for classloading and the access
>> control aspects of that. Conversely Doug wants to continue with
>> functional updates targeted for 8 without needing to work around a
>> potentially fluctuating modularity API - and the need to work in
>> modular and non-modular versions of 8.
>>
>> So my take is that we modify the Atomic classes as needed and worry
>> about sync'ing with Doug at a much later date.
>
> Sorry for the late reply as I took a day off yesterday. I don't see the
> jigsaw source and jsr166e diverging a bad thing. As we want to keep jdk
> changes minimal in jigsaw repo and integrate jdk change to jdk8
> regularly, I was thinking of the steps to get the Atomic classes change
> into jigsaw. Since this is not time critical, it may be best to follow
> the normal way to get the change in jsr166e first and then pulled down
> to openjdk.

Feel free to proceed but I don't see jsr166e adopting anything module 
specific until well after module stuff becomes mainline. I would think 
we need to make modularization changes ahead of time to "bake" them and 
then feed them back to jsr166e. But this is new ground so ...

David
------


> The new needsPackageAccessCheck method in jigsaw repo will be the
> version to work in modular and non-modular versions. The jdk8 version
> will be slightly different and that will not call any jigsaw API (just
> check class loader == null). So I hope it shouldn't be an issue making
> such change in jsr166e. BTW with the new needsPackageAccessCheck method
> you can remove the isAncestor method in all 3 atomic updater classes.
>
> I'd like to push this changeset first and separate the j.u.c. change. If
> it's determined that jsr166e won't make such change for some reason, I
> can modify the Atomic classes and fix that in jigsaw repo.
>
> Mandy