On Jan 31, 2014, at 1:58 AM, Vladimir Ivanov <vladimir.x.iva...@oracle.com> wrote:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vlivanov/8033278/webrev.00/ > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8033278 > > The fix for 8032585 [1] introduced a regression: in some cases access check > on a reference class is omitted. > > The fix is to ensure that access check on a reference class is always > performed. > 104 case PROTECTED: 105 if ((allowedModes & PROTECTED_OR_PACKAGE_ALLOWED) != 0 && 106 isSamePackage(defc, lookupClass)) 107 return true; 108 if ((allowedModes & PROTECTED) == 0) 109 return false; 110 if ((mods & STATIC) != 0 && 111 !isRelatedClass(refc, lookupClass)) 112 return false; 113 if ((allowedModes & PROTECTED) != 0 && 114 isSuperClass(defc, lookupClass)) 115 return true; 116 return false; Can lines 113 to 116 be reduced to: return isSuperClass(defc, lookupClass)); ? The shuffling of the code looks correct (and simpler), but i am fuzzy on the nuances of access control. Paul. > Testing: regression test, jdk/test/java/lang/invoke/, > jdk/test/java/util/stream, vm.defmeth.testlist, vm.mlvm.testlist, nashorn > (unit tests, octane), groovy > > Thanks! > > Best regards, > Vladimir Ivanov > > [1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vlivanov/8032585/webrev.00/
