harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Egor Pasko <egor.pa...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [jira] Created: (HARMONY-3363) [DRLVM] contribution of alternative bytecode verifier
Date Wed, 14 Mar 2007 09:47:34 GMT
On the 0x299 day of Apache Harmony Vera Y. Petrashkova wrote:
> Here are the results of VTS tests running:
> 4320 VTS tests were run
> 4183 - passed on DRLVM
> 4234 - passed on DRLVM with alternative bytecode verifier

thanks a lot!

> Thanks,
> Vera Petrashkova
> 
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Petrashkova, Vera Y [mailto:vera.y.petrashkova@intel.com]
> >Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 6:52 PM
> >To: dev@harmony.apache.org
> >Subject: RE: [jira] Created: (HARMONY-3363) [DRLVM] contribution of
> >alternative bytecode verifier
> >
> >Cool!
> >
> >Do I understand correct that VTS tests [1] that currently fail because
> >of unimplemented subroutine verification will now pass?
> >
> >I'm going to run the DRLVM VTS to check how it impacts the pass rate
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Vera
> >
> >[1] http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-3206
> >
> >>---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >>From: Mikhail Loenko (JIRA) <jira@apache.org>
> >>Date: 12.03.2007 16:55
> >>Subject: [jira] Created: (HARMONY-3363) [DRLVM] contribution of
> >>alternative bytecode verifier
> >>To: commits@harmony.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >>[DRLVM] contribution of alternative bytecode verifier
> >>-----------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >>                Key: HARMONY-3363
> >>                URL:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-3363
> >>            Project: Harmony
> >>         Issue Type: New Feature
> >>         Components: Contributions
> >>           Reporter: Mikhail Loenko
> >>
> >>
> >>This is contribution of experimental bytecode verifier on behalf of
> >Intel.
> >>
> >>"Experimental" means that there is no formal proof currently available
> >>of its equivalence to the step-by-step verification algorithm
> >>described in the spec.
> >>
> >>The only known difference to the conventional verifier is dead code
> >>verification: RI makes stricter checks against dead code.
> >>Since it's about dead code, this difference does not affect
> >vulnerability
> >>
> >>Comparing to the current Harmony verifier, this one is supposed to be
> >>complete (Harmony currently does not support jsr/ret verification) and
> >>much faster
> >>
> >>So, I'm attaching 3 files:
> >>
> >>The first one: Verifier_bulk.zip is a bulk contribution on behalf of
> >>Intel for archiving purposes. It contains the legal files as well
> >>
> >>The second one: Verifier_patch is my fix to the bugs that I found
> >>while the first archive was coming thru legal
> >>
> >>The third archive Verifier_patched.zip is a merge for previous two.
> >>It's an up-to-date version for all the engineering purposes
> >>
> >>To try it out one should replace the current 'verifier' directory in
> >>vm with the new one and rebuild
> >>
> >>--
> >>This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> >>-
> >>You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
> 

-- 
Egor Pasko


Mime
View raw message