On Fri, 6 Dec 2024 21:34:14 GMT, Coleen Phillimore <[email protected]> wrote:
> This change only verifies redefined classes if Verification is enabled.
> BytecodeVerificationRemote will be false for verification turned off. If
> someone turns it off but BytecodeVerificationLocal on (which is
> non-sensical), the argument processing code will fix that up. So all this
> needs to do is check for BytecodeVerifificationRemote for -Xverify:none
> (which is a deprecated option).
>
>
> // Treat the odd case where local verification is enabled but remote
> // verification is not as if both were enabled.
> if (BytecodeVerificationLocal && !BytecodeVerificationRemote) {
> log_info(verification)("Turning on remote verification because local
> verification is on");
> FLAG_SET_DEFAULT(BytecodeVerificationRemote, true);
> }
>
>
> Tested with runtime/verifier, jck vm and tier1-4 (in progress), and the new
> test case.
src/hotspot/share/classfile/verifier.cpp line 137:
> 135: return (should_verify_class &&
> 136: // Override parameter (return false) if -Xverify:none
> 137: BytecodeVerificationRemote &&
Sorry but I don't understand why the correct value for `should_verify` doesn't
filter through from `Verifier::should_verify_for`??? Seems to me that is the
only place where we should explicitly check the verification flags.
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22617#discussion_r1875179302
