RFR: 7093328: JVMTI: jvmtiPrimitiveFieldCallback always report 0's for static primitives

[Rickard Bäckman]

David,

I did some research (archeology), the change that introduced this:

changeset:   2223:c7f3d0b4570f
user:        never
date:        Fri Mar 18 16:00:34 2011 -0700
summary:     7017732: move static fields into Class to prepare for perm ten removal

None of the 6u I tried have the problem.
Makes sense to me…

/R

On Aug 29, 2012, at 10:46 AM, Rickard Bäckman wrote:

> David,
> 
> I'll try to find the sources and see if I can find any obvious difference.
> 
> I've considered adding a regression test, however I couldn't come up with an idea that wouldn't 
> involve native libraries. I've seen a couple of "solutions" of native libraries but none of them seem
> especially practical. I'm considering asking SQE if they could add a test for this…
> 
> Thanks
> /R
> 
> On Aug 29, 2012, at 10:08 AM, David Holmes wrote:
> 
>> Hi Rickard,
>> 
>> On 29/08/2012 5:24 PM, Rickard Bäckman wrote:
>>> can I get a couple of reviews for the following bug fix:
>>> 
>>> http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7093328
>>> webrev: http://rbackman.se.oracle.com/~rbackman/7093328/
>> 
>> Finding the field in the class_mirror certainly seems correct.
>> 
>> But the CR stated this used to work in 6u26, so I'm wondering what changed to cause this to break?
>> 
>> Plus is it feasible to add a regression test for this? We don't seem to be covering this functionality otherwise. :(
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> David
>