On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 09:29:21 GMT, Alan Hayward <d...@openjdk.java.net> wrote:
>> 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." And this change will keep ROP protection enabled if we fall into the "this VM was built without ROP-protection support.". In that case we'll be protecting generated code, but the VM itself won't be protected. This will run without crashing. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6334
