review request (L): 7001379: bootstrap method data needs to be moved from constant pool to a classfile attribute

[Christian Thalinger]

On Nov 25, 2010, at 8:42 AM, John Rose wrote:
> On Nov 22, 2010, at 6:57 PM, John Rose wrote:
> 
>> Because of a strong and reasonable request from the IBM JVM team, the JSR 292 class file format for CONSTANT_InvokeDynamic is changing one more time.
>> ...
>> I will be putting out a review request soon for this.
> 
> 
> Here is a JVM change which moves the variadic parts of CONSTANT_InvokeDynamic specifiers out of the constant pool and into a new attribute, BootstrapMethods.
>  http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jrose/7001379/webrev.hs.00

src/share/vm/classfile/classFileParser.hpp:

+  //@@  static int start_operand_group(GrowableArray<int>* &operands, int op_count, TRAPS);
+  //@@  static void store_operand_array(GrowableArray<int>* operands, constantPoolHandle cp, TRAPS);

Do we still need them?

src/share/vm/oops/constantPoolOop.hpp:

-  void copy_entry_to(int from_i, constantPoolHandle to_cp, int to_i, TRAPS);
+  static void copy_entry_to(constantPoolHandle from_cp, int from_i, constantPoolHandle to_cp, int to_i, TRAPS);

Maybe I'm missing the obvious here but why do need to pass a handle in?  There is nothing fancy going on in that method.

> 
> For review, here is the specification change, in the javadoc in the jdk repo:
>  http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jrose/7001379/webrev.jdk.00

 301  * Each {@code CONSTANT_InvokeDynamic} entry refers has a reference to a
 302  * bootstrap method specifier defined in a separate array.

I think there are some superfluous words.

 317  * {@code BootstrapMethods} attribute.  In particular, each cosntant

Typo.

> 
> The JDK webrev also includes an adjusted unit test.
> 
> The base revision was reviewed by Christian yesterday:
>  http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jrose/7001423/webrev.00
> 
> The JVM code passes the unit test, of course.


-- Christian