Need help with change

[David Holmes]

On 21/05/2013 11:56 PM, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
>
> On 05/21/2013 09:29 AM, Staffan Larsen wrote:
>> When doing heap iteration with JVMTI, the spec requires callbacks from
>> the VM to the agent identifying the signers and protection domain
>> references. This is what tagMap does, see jvmtiTagMap.cpp:2464.
>>
>> As long as it it still possible for JVMTI to find these references
>> (with ik->protection_domain() and ik->signers()), I think it's ok.
>
> Okay.  Thanks for the quick answer.   I was going to rip this out (rats,
> now I can't).  I can get to both protection domain and signers through
> the mirror.
>
> We are working on moving the signers completely to the jdk and not
> having the jvm know about them at all.  Then we can't find the signers
> through this interface.  Should we file a CCC request to change the
> JVMTI spec then?

You can access any Java object field from the JVM - you just need to add 
it to java_classes.cpp :) I don't think you can just rip this out of the 
JVMTI spec.

David
-----

>
> Thanks,
> Coleen
>
>>
>> /Staffan
>>
>>
>> On 21 maj 2013, at 14:52, Coleen Phillimore
>> <coleen.phillimore at oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I found during code review comment editing for my change that removes
>>> signers and protection domain from the InstanceKlass, that JVMTI code
>>> seems to have some sort of call back and knowledge of these fields in
>>> instanceKlass.
>>>
>>>           </constant>
>>>           <constant id="JVMTI_REFERENCE_SIGNERS" num="5">
>>>             Reference from a class to its signers array.
>>>           </constant>
>>>           <constant id="JVMTI_REFERENCE_PROTECTION_DOMAIN" num="6">
>>>             Reference from a class to its protection domain.
>>>
>>>
>>> If I remove these, will it cause incompatibilities?   It's used
>>> during jvmtiTagMap.cpp (whatever that's doing).
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Coleen
>