Hi Serguei, Thanks again for the prompt code review.
On 10/08/2013 04:56 PM, [email protected] wrote:
It looks good.
A question:
1011 case JVM_CONSTANT_MethodType:
1012 {
1013 int k1 = method_type_index_at_error_ok(index1);
1014 int k2 = cp2->method_type_index_at_error_ok(index2);
. . .
1021 case JVM_CONSTANT_MethodHandle:
1022 {
1023 int k1 = method_handle_ref_kind_at_error_ok(index1);
1024 int k2 = cp2->method_handle_ref_kind_at_error_ok(index2);
Should the above include InError variants ?:
1011 case JVM_CONSTANT_MethodType:
case JVM_CONSTANT_MethodTypeInError:
1012 {
1013 int k1 = method_type_index_at_error_ok(index1);
1014 int k2 = cp2->method_type_index_at_error_ok(index2);
. . .
1021 case JVM_CONSTANT_MethodHandle:
case JVM_CONSTANT_MethodHandleInError:
1022 {
1023 int k1 = method_handle_ref_kind_at_error_ok(index1);
1024 int k2 = cp2->method_handle_ref_kind_at_error_ok(index2);
No, because I normalize these InError constant pool entries above, so
they won't be found.
thanks,
Coleen
Thanks,
Serguei
On 10/8/13 11:27 AM, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
Summary: Add missing cases.
I verified this with the test for
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8022701 but don't want to
copy the test into with modifications the hotspot repository, still
working on refactoring the test for the JDK repository for after this
gets pushed.
open webrev at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8025185/
bug link https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8025185
Thanks,
Coleen
