3-rd round RFR (S) 8008678: JSR 292: constant pool reconstitution must support pseudo strings

serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com
Fri Jan 16 20:07:51 UTC 2015


Please, review the fix for:
   https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8008678


Open webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sspitsyn/webrevs/2015/hotspot/8008678-JVMTI-pseudo.3/


Summary:
    Currently, a JVM_CONSTANT_String CP entry having a NULL reference to 
Symbol*
    indicates that it is a pseudo-string (patched string).
    This creates nasty issues for the constant pool reconstitution.

    Current suggestion is to avoid having a NULL reference and retain 
the original
    Symbol* reference for pseudo-strings. The pseudo-string indication 
will be
    if the Utf8 representation starts from "CONSTANT_PLACEHOLDER_".
    This approach makes the fix much simpler.

    I need a confirmation from the Compiler team that this won't break 
any assumptions or invariants.
    Big thanks to Coleen for previous round reviews and good advices!


Testing:
   Run:
    - java/lang/instrument tests
    - new jtreg test (see webrev) that was written by Filipp Zhinkin


Thanks,
Serguei


On 12/18/14 2:00 PM, serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com wrote:
> Hi Coleen,
>
> Thank you for reviewing!
>
>
> On 12/18/14 11:23 AM, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
>>
>> Hi Serguei,
>>
>> Thank you for making the patches an optional field.
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sspitsyn/webrevs/2014/hotspot/8008678-JVMTI-pseudo.2/src/share/vm/oops/constantPool.hpp.sdiff.html
>>   198     if (!patched()) {
>>   199       assert(false, "a pseudo-string map may exists for patched CP only");
>>   200       return 0;
>>   201     }
>> Why not
>>                 assert(patched(), "a pseud-string map must exist for 
>> patched CP only");
>
> Wanted it to be more reliable but it looks pointless.
> Will make this change.
>
>>
>>
>> Why is this?   Is this really a ShouldNotReachHere?  should it be false?
>>
>>   215     assert(true, "not found a matching entry in pseudo-string map");
>
>
> A typo, must be false.
> It is the last minute change.
> Thanks for the catch!
>
>
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sspitsyn/webrevs/2014/hotspot/8008678-JVMTI-pseudo.2/src/share/vm/prims/jvmtiRedefineClasses.cpp.udiff.html
>>
>> Don't you have to move the value of the patched field from the old 
>> constant pool to the new one?  I hate to ask but is there merging 
>> that needs to be done?   I don't know how to write this test case 
>> though.  Is it possible to redefine a class with a constant pool 
>> patches with another that has constant pool patches?
>
> Thank you for asking this question.
> If I understand correctly, the patching comes from the compiler side 
> for anonymous classes only.
> I saw it for LambdaForm's only.
> I think, the patching can not be changed with a retransformation.
> But I'm not sure if it can not be changed with a redefinition.
>
> But if it can - then it would be safe to merge the 'patched' 
> condition, i.e. make it patched
> if either the_class or scratch class is patched.
>
>>
>> Somehow I thought you'd have to save the value of the cp_patches oops 
>> passed in.
>>
>> So I was wondering why you can't change this instead:
>>
>>   bool is_pseudo_string_at(int which) {
>>     // A pseudo string is a string that doesn't have a symbol in the 
>> cpSlot
>> -    return unresolved_string_at(which) == NULL;
>> +   return (strncmp(unresolved_string_at(which)->as_utf8(), 
>> "CONSTANT_PLACEHOLDER_" , strlen("CONSTANT_PLACEHOLDER")) == 0);
>>   }
>
> I was thinking about the same but was not sure if it would work for 
> the compiler team.
> We have to ask John about this (added John and Christian to the cc-list).
> This question to John was in my plan! :)
>
> The beauty of the above approach is that there is no need to create an 
> intermediate
> pseudo-string map and most of the code in from this webrev is not needed.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Serguei
>
>>
>> And the asserts in the other functions below it.
>>
>> Coleen
>>
>>
>> On 12/17/14, 12:26 PM, serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com wrote:
>>> Please, review the second round fix for:
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8008678
>>>
>>> Open webrev:
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sspitsyn/webrevs/2014/hotspot/8008678-JVMTI-pseudo.2/
>>>
>>>
>>> Summary:
>>>
>>>   This fix implements a footprint saving approach suggested by Coleen.
>>>   To be able to reconstitute a class constant pool, an intermediate 
>>> pseudo-string map is used.
>>>   Now, this field is accounted optionally, only if the 'cp_patches' 
>>> is provided in the
>>>   ClassFileParser::parseClassFile() before ConstantPool is allocated.
>>>   This fix is not elegant, even a little bit ugly, but it is the 
>>> only way I see so far.
>>>
>>>   Unfortunately, this approach did not help much to make some other 
>>> fields (eg., 'operands') optional.
>>>   The problem is that we have to account optional fields before 
>>> parsing, at the CP allocation time.
>>>   It is possible to re-allocate the ConstantPool when any 
>>> InvokeDynamic bytecode is discovered,
>>>   but it looks too complicated.
>>>
>>> Testing:
>>>   - the unit test from bug report
>>>   - nsk.jvmti,testlist, nsk.jdi.testlist, JTREG java/lang/instrument
>>>   - vm.mlvm.testlist, vm.quick.testlist, 
>>> vm.parallel_class_loading.testlist (in progress)
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Serguei
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/26/14 11:53 AM, serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com wrote:
>>>> Coleen,
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for looking at this!
>>>> I'll check how this can be improved.
>>>> It is my concern too.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Serguei
>>>>
>>>> On 11/26/14 9:17 AM, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Serguei,
>>>>> I had a quick look at this.  I was wondering if we could make the 
>>>>> pseudo_string_map conditional in ConstantPool and not make all 
>>>>> classes pay in footprint for this field?  The same thing probably 
>>>>> could be done for operands too.  There are flags that you can set 
>>>>> to conditionally add a pointer to base() in this function.
>>>>>
>>>>> Typical C++ would subclass ConstantPool to add 
>>>>> InvokeDynamicConstantPool fields, but this is not typical C++ so 
>>>>> the trick we use is like the one in ConstMethod. I think it's 
>>>>> worth doing in this case.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Coleen
>>>>>
>>>>> On 11/26/14, 3:59 AM, serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com wrote:
>>>>>> Please, review the fix for:
>>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8008678
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Open webrev:
>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sspitsyn/webrevs/2014/hotspot/8008678-JVMTI-pseudo.1/ 
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Summary:
>>>>>>    The pseudo-strings are currently not supported in 
>>>>>> reconstitution of constant pool.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    This is an explanation from John Rose about what the 
>>>>>> pseudo-strings are:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    "We still need "live" oop constants pre-linked into the 
>>>>>> constant pool of bytecodes which
>>>>>>     implement some method handles. We use the anonymous class 
>>>>>> pseudo-string feature for that.
>>>>>>     The relevant code is here:
>>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/jdk8/jdk/file/tip/src/share/classes/java/lang/invoke/InvokerBytecodeGenerator.java 
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     These oops are what "pseudo-strings" are.
>>>>>>     The odd name refers to the fact that, even though they are 
>>>>>> random oops, they appear in the constant pool
>>>>>>     where one would expect (because of class file syntax) to find 
>>>>>> a string."
>>>>>>      ...
>>>>>>     If you really wanted to reconstitute a class file for an 
>>>>>> anonymous class, and
>>>>>>     if that class has oop patching (pseudo-strings), you would 
>>>>>> need either to (a) reconstitute the patches array
>>>>>>     handed to Unsafe.defineAnonymousClass, or (b) accept whatever 
>>>>>> odd strings were there first, as an approximation.
>>>>>>     The "odd strings" are totally insignificant, and are 
>>>>>> typically something like "CONSTANT_PLACEHOLDER_42"
>>>>>>     (see java/lang/invoke/InvokerBytecodeGenerator.java)."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    Reconstitution of the ConstantPool is needed for both the 
>>>>>> JVMTI GetConstantPool() and RetransformClasses().
>>>>>>    Finally, it goes to the ConstantPool::copy_cpool_bytes().
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    The problem is that a pseudo-string is a patched string that 
>>>>>> does not have
>>>>>>    a reference to the string symbol anymore:
>>>>>>        unresolved_string_at(idx) == NULL
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    The fix is to create and fill in a map from 
>>>>>> JVM_CONSTANT_String cp index to the JVM_CONSTANT_Utf8 cp index
>>>>>>    to be able to restore this assotiation in the 
>>>>>> JvmtiConstantPoolReconstituter.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Testing:
>>>>>>   Run:
>>>>>>    - java/lang/instrument tests
>>>>>>    - new jtreg test (see webrev) that was written by Filipp Zhinkin
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Serguei
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/attachments/20150116/0d43de0e/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the serviceability-dev mailing list