Mailing-List: contact dev-help@harmony.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of ivan.g.popov@gmail.com
 designates 64.233.182.188 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=dS63OcPdQetqk24CywRU9aP/oqaD9WLVtRr8222Qt01J0vUpSeP/fV1p55KWQafrrNlAwRHDenJ1kFr00qq4HrdDvPoxPHX8laXWQMh6n5y99JuekZoouapLRizx8T/8LeMKRZ82yGcJpah/seYHxP0WXb7EsRevvjDlA0kdNV8=
Message-ID: <b6cb498e0701300141y4734500fs7c69a3117d4a6c6f@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 15:41:49 +0600
From: "Ivan Popov" <ivan.g.popov@gmail.com>
To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Subject: Re: [drlvm][verifier] verifier behavior is not compatible with RI
In-Reply-To: <ca4b22060701300032k604489d9q81b042425dded4f7@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <b6cb498e0701150719v64a6124dwd9e361d50aba8aab@mail.gmail.com>
	 <eor0fd$sfl$1@sea.gmane.org>
	 <39C341DB-533A-471F-B99E-687D5DC28B47@pobox.com>
	 <ca4b22060701300032k604489d9q81b042425dded4f7@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks, Pavel. I hope this will resolve problem with Java profiler
(HARMONY-2905).

I think we should also enable option -Xfuture, which is currently
rejected by DRLVM, because Java developers may use it in their scripts
and environment. I submitted HARMONY-3081, could you please look at
it.

Thanks.
Ivan

On 1/30/07, Pavel Rebriy <pavel.rebriy@gmail.com> wrote:
> Let I try to explain how verifications are working. There are 3 modes of
> DRLVM verifier:
>
> 1. Default mode =96 without any VM control options
>
> In this mode DRLVM verifier should be compatible with RI default mode.
>
> 2. With options "=96verify" or "=96Xverify"
>
> This mode is supposed to verify more strict checks of class file format
> (such as correct naming of fields and methods in constant pool), besides
> expects verification of classes loaded by bootstrap classloader.
>
> 3. With options "-Xverify:all"
>
> This mode is supposed to more strict verification of classes (such as
> interface classes' verification).
>
> Because reference VM doesn't support verification of 'uninitialized this'
> class reference under exception handler protection I'm going to move it t=
o
> mode 3, so check this verification only if option =96Xverify:all is set.
>
> Such behavior should be compatible with reference VM.
>
>
> On 22/01/07, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Jan 19, 2007, at 12:51 PM, Gregory Shimansky wrote:
> >
> > > Ivan Popov wrote:
> > >> I'd like to discuss the problem with Eclipse TPTP profiler working
> > >> with DRLVM, which is described in HARMONY-2905 [1].  The problem is
> > >
> > > There is always a workaround to verifier exceptions. You can run
> > > the program with -Xverify:none to disable verifier completely.
> > > Turning this particular check is simple too. The question is
> > > whether this should be a default mode in VM or whether it should be
> > > enabled by some special option which doesn't disable all other
> > > verifications.
> > >
> >
> > I'm also darn curious why Sun's verifier doesn't have the problem...
> >
> > geir
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Pavel Rebriy
>
>