[foreign] RFR: add missing Lookup parameters on bind/bindRaw

[Maurizio Cimadamore]

On 15/05/18 13:09, Sundararajan Athijegannathan wrote:
> * checkLookup():
>
>     could add explicit null check by 
> Objects.requireNonNull(lookup).hasPrivateAccess()
ok - I also realized that checkLookup is missing from 
Libraries.loadLibrary!!
>
> * BindTest is meant to be a security test (always runs with security 
> manager with explicit policy -- and tests except security exception). 
> I'm not sure we want to switch ff that
Well, my interpretation of BinderTest is that it checks as to whether 
the binding can take place; there are a bunch of reasons as that should 
not be the case; one of those is the SecurityManager, but this patch 
introduces another one, which is lookup object not being private. There 
are also checks on null values.

Are you suggesting we should have a separate test for each of these 
axis? What would be the added value in doing so?

Maurizio
>
> -Sundar
>
> On 15/05/18, 5:23 PM, Maurizio Cimadamore wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 15/05/18 12:50, Maurizio Cimadamore wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> as per yesterday cleanup, the Libraries API now takes a 
>>> MethodHandles.Lookup that is used to perform caller-sensitive native 
>>> library searches. The methods bind/bindRaw (the versions _not_ 
>>> accepting an explicit Library object) should also get same 
>>> treatment. Moreover, there should be a check for filtering out 
>>> non-private lookup objects.
>>>
>>> I've updated few tests to add missing lookup object parameter, and 
>>> also added a new variant of BindTest which checks for 
>>> IllegalArgumentException in case a bad lookup object (a public one) 
>>> is supplied.
>>>
>>> Webrev:
>>>
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcimadamore/panama/cleanup-v2/
>> Wrong link
>>
>> here's the correct one:
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcimadamore/panama/lookup-bind-v2/
>>
>> Maurizio
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Maurizio
>>>
>>