This looks good to me also.
Coleen
On 6/4/20 3:20 AM, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote:
Please, review a fix for:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8245321
Webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sspitsyn/webrevs/2020/jvmti-redef-refact.1/
Summary:
The jvmtiRedefineClasses.cpp functions check_nest_attributes and
check_permitted_subclasses_attribute have significant common part.
This fix is a refactoring which implements this common part into
the function check_attribute_arrays. And this function is used in
both check_nest_attributes and check_permitted_subclasses_attribute.
The check_record_attributes was initially considered to be included
into this refactoring. However, it has many differences in layout.
I've decided, it is not worth to introduce more complexity into this
refactoring in order to support this function as well. But, please.
let me know if this function refactoring is still desirable.
Testing:
Local test runs with the RedefineNestmateAttr and
RedefinePermittedSubclassesAttr
tests on a Linux server are passed.
In progress: submit mach5 jobs with the same Nestmates and
PermittedSubclasses tests.
Thanks,
Serguei
