On Tue, 1 Feb 2022 18:33:28 GMT, Andrew Haley <a...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> But we can't honour that because it is not supported. Further, the >> suggestion in the referenced discussion seemed to be based on the assumption >> that doing so would be harmless because it is NOP based, but you have >> indicated that may not be the case and so it may actually lead to a crash! > > Given that the implementation has now changed so much that it's no longer NOP > based, I'll go with @dholmes-ora . > One other thing, though: it might be better to say here "but this VM was > built without ROP-protection support." That's more informative, IMO. Ok, I'll fix up as suggested. The beginning part of that message needs fixing too - UseROPProtection is no longer the name of the flag. I'll switch to: "ROP-protection specified, but this VM was built without ROP-protection support." ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6334
