So the new verifier has this issue from the very begining? And this is not a regression, right?
Does anybody know when new verifier was commited? SY, Alexey 2007/9/6, Alexei Fedotov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Alexey, > > Sorry. At the time I wrote that observation I was confused with the > alternative verifier convention to return _FALSE to indicate a > successful check in checkAccess* functions. > > The problem happens in a different place and is related to mixing of > classes from different class loaders. The fact is that compared class > handles reference different class loaders, and this might be problem > of the verifier internal cache. > > I've updated HARMONY-4738 [1] with the latest information, but > resolution is not clear yet. > > Thanks. > > [1] http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-4738 > > > On 9/6/07, Alexey Petrenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thanks, Alexei. > > > > So I would say that we should revert this patch and then think on how > > to resolve the issue in better way? > > > > Thoughts? > > > > SY, Alexey > > > > 2007/9/5, Alexei Fedotov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Gregory, > > > Thanks for your help! > > > > > > My observation is that the problem showed itself after the following fix > > > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=563763 > > > > > > Tracking things in a debugger I can see that the following new line of > > > code returns unexpected result. I will dig further into the behavior > > > of this function. > > > - return _TRUE; > > > + return !class_is_same_package(k_class, referred) && > > > vf_is_extending(k_class, referred); > > > > > > With best regards, Alexei > > > > > > On 9/5/07, Mark Hindess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 5 September 2007 at 16:05, Gregory Shimansky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > Alexey Petrenko wrote: > > > > > > 2007/9/4, Gregory Shimansky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > >> Gregory Shimansky wrote: > > > > > >>> It seems to be a bug in verifier, but there weren't any changes in > > > > > >>> verifier recently, so I am not sure it is a regression. Probably > > > > > >>> this > > > > > >>> bug was hidden and didn't show up until recently. > > > > > >> BTW, building DRLVM with -Duse_original_verifier=true allows > > > > > >> eclipse 3.3 > > > > > >> to start. I think that maybe switching back to older verifier again > > > > > >> might improve the situation. > > > > > > Yes, this helps. -noverify should also help in this case. > > > > > > > > > > > > I've created HARMONY-4738 to track the issue. > > > > > > It would be nice if someone familiar with the verifier could fix > > > > > > the issue. > > > > > > > > > > BTW I think I've found out the reason for this bug. Eclipse 3.3 has an > > > > > ICU4J implementation bundled with it. It uses ICU 3.6.1 while we have > > > > > ICU4J 3.4.4 in bootclasspath. > > > > > > > > > > In this case ICU classes are loaded from our 3.4.4 JAR file except for > > > > > some classes that may not be present in the older version. In this > > > > > case > > > > > they are taken from Eclipse's JAR file which leads to inconsistencies. > > > > > > > > > > I wonder why older verifier implementation works ok... > > > > > > > > No idea. I also wonder why J9 is unaffected. > > > > > > > > FYI: I see similar but not identical problems on Linux. > > > > > > > > -Mark. > > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-4738 > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> 2007/9/4, Alexey Petrenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > >>>>> Yes, looks like we really have a regression. > > > > > >>>>> I've tried Eclipse with M2 and recent classlib with j9 and > > > > > >>>>> works in > > > > > >>>>> both cases. But silently crashes silently in the very beging. > > > > > >>>>> Even > > > > > >>>>> without trace in configuration directory. > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> So we need to investigate the issue. > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> Any help is welcome :) > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> SY, Alexey > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> 2007/9/4, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > >>>>>> Leo Li wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>> On 9/4/07, Alexey Petrenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>> Guys, > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> I've tried to run In Harmony with Eclipse bundle on the > > > > > >>>>>>>> recent > > > > > >>>>>>>> harmony/drlvm build but it crashes silently in the very > > > > > >>>>>>>> begining. > > > > > >>>>>>>> I would say that this is very serious regression for us. > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> I'll continue investigation but it would be nice if someone > > > > > >>>>>>>> will try > > > > > >>>>>>>> to investigate it in the same time. > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> Thanks in advance. > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> SY, Alexey > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> Yes, it is a serious regression. And do you know when it > > > > > >>>>>>> start to > > > > > >>>>>>> fail? > > > > > >>>>>>> I will try it when I go to office tomorrow since I have no > > > > > >>>>>>> classlib > > > > > >>>>>>> on hand. Not sure whether I can help.:) > > > > > >>>>>> FYI: It's working ok for me on the current HEAD of classlib > > > > > >>>>>> (r572680) > > > > > >>>>>> with the IBM VME. > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> Regards, > > > > > >>>>>> Tim > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> -- > > > > > >> Gregory > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Gregory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > With best regards, > > > Alexei, > > > ESSD, Intel > > > > > > > > -- > With best regards, > Alexei, > ESSD, Intel >
