harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <g...@pobox.com>
Subject Re: [DRLVM] contribution of alternative bytecode verifier
Date Thu, 15 Mar 2007 11:19:07 GMT
THis is great - it will be interesting to see what/if the TCK says  
about it.

geir

On Mar 14, 2007, at 7:06 AM, Mikhail Loenko wrote:

> 2007/3/14, Petrashkova, Vera Y <vera.y.petrashkova@intel.com>:
>>
>> 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, Vera!
>
> So, some words about the contribution (H-3363)
>
> As you probably know classic implementation of verifier requires
> complex time and memory consuming dataflow analysis that generates a
> proof of type safety.
>
> Some alternative approaches, for example CLDC verifier, require the
> class file to be annotated with the proof of type safety. To make sure
> the byte code is valid, verifier just validates the proof. That
> validation is fast and does not require much memory.
>
> The contributed verifier is a new verification approach based on
> Constraint Propagation. It takes the original Java Class File
> containing no additional information. For that class file it neither
> generates a direct proof of its validness nor validates any existing
> proof.
>
> Instead it generates a proof that a proof of validness does exist :)
>
> The approach results in significant performance and memory footprint
> advantage over regular verification.
>
> I'm finishing a document describing new verification in more details
> and going to put it into the Harmony docs
>
> Thanks,
> Mikhail


Mime
View raw message