[10] JBS: 8167408: Invalid critical JNI function lookup

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
12 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[10] JBS: 8167408: Invalid critical JNI function lookup

Jamsheed C m
Hi,

request for review,

jbs : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167408

webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.00/

(contributed by Ioannis Tsakpinis)

desc:

-- it starts with JavaCritical_ instead of Java_;
-- it does not have extra JNIEnv* and jclass arguments;
-- Java arrays are passed in two arguments: the first is an array
length, and the second is a pointer to raw array data. That is, no need
to call GetArrayElements and friends, you can instantly use a direct
array pointer.

updated arg_size calculation wrt above points.

Best regards,

Jamsheed

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [10] JBS: 8167408: Invalid critical JNI function lookup

dean.long
I think you need a native test for Windows x86 that defines JavaCritical
methods with various signatures (especially arrays) to make sure this is
working correctly.

dl


On 10/30/17 9:45 AM, jamsheed wrote:

> Hi,
>
> request for review,
>
> jbs : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167408
>
> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.00/
>
> (contributed by Ioannis Tsakpinis)
>
> desc:
>
> -- it starts with JavaCritical_ instead of Java_;
> -- it does not have extra JNIEnv* and jclass arguments;
> -- Java arrays are passed in two arguments: the first is an array
> length, and the second is a pointer to raw array data. That is, no
> need to call GetArrayElements and friends, you can instantly use a
> direct array pointer.
>
> updated arg_size calculation wrt above points.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jamsheed
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [10] JBS: 8167408: Invalid critical JNI function lookup

Jamsheed C m
Hi Dean,

Thank you for the review,

tested with a test case, previously it was not working for windows-x86,
now it works.

revised webrev with test
case:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.01/

Best regards,

Jamsheed


On Tuesday 31 October 2017 02:18 AM, [hidden email] wrote:

> I think you need a native test for Windows x86 that defines
> JavaCritical methods with various signatures (especially arrays) to
> make sure this is working correctly.
>
> dl
>
>
> On 10/30/17 9:45 AM, jamsheed wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> request for review,
>>
>> jbs : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167408
>>
>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.00/
>>
>> (contributed by Ioannis Tsakpinis)
>>
>> desc:
>>
>> -- it starts with JavaCritical_ instead of Java_;
>> -- it does not have extra JNIEnv* and jclass arguments;
>> -- Java arrays are passed in two arguments: the first is an array
>> length, and the second is a pointer to raw array data. That is, no
>> need to call GetArrayElements and friends, you can instantly use a
>> direct array pointer.
>>
>> updated arg_size calculation wrt above points.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Jamsheed
>>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [10] JBS: 8167408: Invalid critical JNI function lookup

Vladimir Ivanov
Jamsheed, nice test!

2 suggestions:

   (1) Enable the test on all platforms: though the bug is
platform-specific, it doesn't mean the test should be. I don't see any
platform-specific code there and it's beneficial to test other platforms
as well

   (2) Add some test cases with multiple array parameters.

Otherwise, looks good.

Best regards,
Vladimir Ivanov

On 10/31/17 10:37 PM, jamsheed wrote:

> Hi Dean,
>
> Thank you for the review,
>
> tested with a test case, previously it was not working for windows-x86,
> now it works.
>
> revised webrev with test
> case:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.01/
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jamsheed
>
>
> On Tuesday 31 October 2017 02:18 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>> I think you need a native test for Windows x86 that defines
>> JavaCritical methods with various signatures (especially arrays) to
>> make sure this is working correctly.
>>
>> dl
>>
>>
>> On 10/30/17 9:45 AM, jamsheed wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> request for review,
>>>
>>> jbs : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167408
>>>
>>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.00/
>>>
>>> (contributed by Ioannis Tsakpinis)
>>>
>>> desc:
>>>
>>> -- it starts with JavaCritical_ instead of Java_;
>>> -- it does not have extra JNIEnv* and jclass arguments;
>>> -- Java arrays are passed in two arguments: the first is an array
>>> length, and the second is a pointer to raw array data. That is, no
>>> need to call GetArrayElements and friends, you can instantly use a
>>> direct array pointer.
>>>
>>> updated arg_size calculation wrt above points.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Jamsheed
>>>
>>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [10] JBS: 8167408: Invalid critical JNI function lookup

dean.long
In reply to this post by Jamsheed C m
OK, somehow I missed the part about JavaCritical methods only being
called from compiled code.  So -Xcomp makes sense.

dl


On 11/1/17 5:46 AM, Vladimir Ivanov wrote:

> No magic here: the test isn't designed to be executed in interpreter
> and always expect LookUp::test() to be compiled first.
>
> Normal JNI entries are empty, but the test checks that the first
> element is written to on the first invocation.
>
> I agree that the bug is specific to JIT-compilers, since critical
> entry points (JavaCritical_) are called only from compiled code.
> Interpreter always goes through ordinary native counterparts (Java_).
>
> IMO using -Xcomp is fine to force the methods to be compiled. -Xbatch
> is redundant in that case.
>
> Best regards,
> Vladimir Ivanov
>
> On 11/1/17 7:46 AM, David Holmes wrote:
>> On 1/11/2017 1:11 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>> On 1/11/2017 1:03 PM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>> Much better.  But why does the test need -Xbatch -Xcomp?  To me
>>>> this doesn't look like a compiler-only issue.  The test should give
>>>> the same result with -Xint right?  Adding runtime alias for their
>>>> input...
>>>
>>> AFAICS this should be a completely compiler and platform agnostic
>>> issue.
>>
>> Platform agnostic yes, but the test fails without -Xcomp (doesn't
>> seem to need -Xbatch). So there's something about this critical
>> function mechanism that I don't understand.
>>
>> That said the test needs more logging so that if it does fail you can
>> see what, if anything got executed. So the non-critical versions of
>> the methods should print that they were called, and for good measure
>> also the critical versions.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> David
>>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: [10] JBS: 8167408: Invalid critical JNI function lookup

Doerr, Martin
In reply to this post by Jamsheed C m
Hi Jamsheed,

seems like this lookup style is not used on all platforms. On PPC64, the test works with and without your fix.
nm only shows:
T Java_compiler_criticalnatives_LookUp_m1
T Java_compiler_criticalnatives_LookUp_m2
T Java_compiler_criticalnatives_LookUp_m3
T JavaCritical_compiler_criticalnatives_LookUp_m1
T JavaCritical_compiler_criticalnatives_LookUp_m2
T JavaCritical_compiler_criticalnatives_LookUp_m3

Anyway, the fix and the test look good to me. I agree with that it makes sense to run in on all platforms.

Best regards,
Martin


-----Original Message-----
From: hotspot-compiler-dev [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of jamsheed
Sent: Dienstag, 31. Oktober 2017 20:38
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [10] JBS: 8167408: Invalid critical JNI function lookup

Hi Dean,

Thank you for the review,

tested with a test case, previously it was not working for windows-x86,
now it works.

revised webrev with test
case:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.01/

Best regards,

Jamsheed


On Tuesday 31 October 2017 02:18 AM, [hidden email] wrote:

> I think you need a native test for Windows x86 that defines
> JavaCritical methods with various signatures (especially arrays) to
> make sure this is working correctly.
>
> dl
>
>
> On 10/30/17 9:45 AM, jamsheed wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> request for review,
>>
>> jbs : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167408
>>
>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.00/
>>
>> (contributed by Ioannis Tsakpinis)
>>
>> desc:
>>
>> -- it starts with JavaCritical_ instead of Java_;
>> -- it does not have extra JNIEnv* and jclass arguments;
>> -- Java arrays are passed in two arguments: the first is an array
>> length, and the second is a pointer to raw array data. That is, no
>> need to call GetArrayElements and friends, you can instantly use a
>> direct array pointer.
>>
>> updated arg_size calculation wrt above points.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Jamsheed
>>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [10] JBS: 8167408: Invalid critical JNI function lookup

Jamsheed C m
In reply to this post by Vladimir Ivanov
Hi Dean, David, Martin, Vladimir,

incorporated most of the suggestions, let me know if this is ok!

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.02/

Best regards

Jamsheed

On Wednesday 01 November 2017 03:58 AM, Vladimir Ivanov wrote:

> Jamsheed, nice test!
>
> 2 suggestions:
>
>   (1) Enable the test on all platforms: though the bug is
> platform-specific, it doesn't mean the test should be. I don't see any
> platform-specific code there and it's beneficial to test other
> platforms as well
>
>   (2) Add some test cases with multiple array parameters.
>
> Otherwise, looks good.
>
> Best regards,
> Vladimir Ivanov
>
> On 10/31/17 10:37 PM, jamsheed wrote:
>> Hi Dean,
>>
>> Thank you for the review,
>>
>> tested with a test case, previously it was not working for
>> windows-x86, now it works.
>>
>> revised webrev with test
>> case:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.01/
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Jamsheed
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday 31 October 2017 02:18 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>> I think you need a native test for Windows x86 that defines
>>> JavaCritical methods with various signatures (especially arrays) to
>>> make sure this is working correctly.
>>>
>>> dl
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/30/17 9:45 AM, jamsheed wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> request for review,
>>>>
>>>> jbs : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167408
>>>>
>>>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.00/
>>>>
>>>> (contributed by Ioannis Tsakpinis)
>>>>
>>>> desc:
>>>>
>>>> -- it starts with JavaCritical_ instead of Java_;
>>>> -- it does not have extra JNIEnv* and jclass arguments;
>>>> -- Java arrays are passed in two arguments: the first is an array
>>>> length, and the second is a pointer to raw array data. That is, no
>>>> need to call GetArrayElements and friends, you can instantly use a
>>>> direct array pointer.
>>>>
>>>> updated arg_size calculation wrt above points.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>> Jamsheed
>>>>
>>>
>>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [10] JBS: 8167408: Invalid critical JNI function lookup

Jamsheed C m
In reply to this post by Doerr, Martin
Hi Martin,


On Thursday 02 November 2017 09:31 PM, Doerr, Martin wrote:

> Hi Jamsheed,
>
> seems like this lookup style is not used on all platforms. On PPC64, the test works with and without your fix.
> nm only shows:
> T Java_compiler_criticalnatives_LookUp_m1
> T Java_compiler_criticalnatives_LookUp_m2
> T Java_compiler_criticalnatives_LookUp_m3
> T JavaCritical_compiler_criticalnatives_LookUp_m1
> T JavaCritical_compiler_criticalnatives_LookUp_m2
> T JavaCritical_compiler_criticalnatives_LookUp_m3
Thank you for checking,
>
> Anyway, the fix and the test look good to me. I agree with that it makes sense to run in on all platforms.
sure, i will make it to run on all platform.
Best regards,
Jamsheed

>
> Best regards,
> Martin
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: hotspot-compiler-dev [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of jamsheed
> Sent: Dienstag, 31. Oktober 2017 20:38
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [10] JBS: 8167408: Invalid critical JNI function lookup
>
> Hi Dean,
>
> Thank you for the review,
>
> tested with a test case, previously it was not working for windows-x86,
> now it works.
>
> revised webrev with test
> case:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.01/
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jamsheed
>
>
> On Tuesday 31 October 2017 02:18 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>> I think you need a native test for Windows x86 that defines
>> JavaCritical methods with various signatures (especially arrays) to
>> make sure this is working correctly.
>>
>> dl
>>
>>
>> On 10/30/17 9:45 AM, jamsheed wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> request for review,
>>>
>>> jbs : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167408
>>>
>>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.00/
>>>
>>> (contributed by Ioannis Tsakpinis)
>>>
>>> desc:
>>>
>>> -- it starts with JavaCritical_ instead of Java_;
>>> -- it does not have extra JNIEnv* and jclass arguments;
>>> -- Java arrays are passed in two arguments: the first is an array
>>> length, and the second is a pointer to raw array data. That is, no
>>> need to call GetArrayElements and friends, you can instantly use a
>>> direct array pointer.
>>>
>>> updated arg_size calculation wrt above points.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Jamsheed
>>>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [10] JBS: 8167408: Invalid critical JNI function lookup

dean.long
In reply to this post by Jamsheed C m
It looks good now.

dl


On 11/3/17 8:06 AM, jamsheed wrote:

> Hi Dean, David, Martin, Vladimir,
>
> incorporated most of the suggestions, let me know if this is ok!
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.02/
>
> Best regards
>
> Jamsheed
>
> On Wednesday 01 November 2017 03:58 AM, Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
>> Jamsheed, nice test!
>>
>> 2 suggestions:
>>
>>   (1) Enable the test on all platforms: though the bug is
>> platform-specific, it doesn't mean the test should be. I don't see
>> any platform-specific code there and it's beneficial to test other
>> platforms as well
>>
>>   (2) Add some test cases with multiple array parameters.
>>
>> Otherwise, looks good.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Vladimir Ivanov
>>
>> On 10/31/17 10:37 PM, jamsheed wrote:
>>> Hi Dean,
>>>
>>> Thank you for the review,
>>>
>>> tested with a test case, previously it was not working for
>>> windows-x86, now it works.
>>>
>>> revised webrev with test
>>> case:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.01/
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Jamsheed
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tuesday 31 October 2017 02:18 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>> I think you need a native test for Windows x86 that defines
>>>> JavaCritical methods with various signatures (especially arrays) to
>>>> make sure this is working correctly.
>>>>
>>>> dl
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 10/30/17 9:45 AM, jamsheed wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> request for review,
>>>>>
>>>>> jbs : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167408
>>>>>
>>>>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.00/
>>>>>
>>>>> (contributed by Ioannis Tsakpinis)
>>>>>
>>>>> desc:
>>>>>
>>>>> -- it starts with JavaCritical_ instead of Java_;
>>>>> -- it does not have extra JNIEnv* and jclass arguments;
>>>>> -- Java arrays are passed in two arguments: the first is an array
>>>>> length, and the second is a pointer to raw array data. That is, no
>>>>> need to call GetArrayElements and friends, you can instantly use a
>>>>> direct array pointer.
>>>>>
>>>>> updated arg_size calculation wrt above points.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Jamsheed
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [10] JBS: 8167408: Invalid critical JNI function lookup

Jamsheed C m
Thank you, Dean

Best regards,

Jamsheed

On Saturday 04 November 2017 12:53 AM, [hidden email] wrote:

> It looks good now.
>
> dl
>
>
> On 11/3/17 8:06 AM, jamsheed wrote:
>> Hi Dean, David, Martin, Vladimir,
>>
>> incorporated most of the suggestions, let me know if this is ok!
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.02/
>>
>> Best regards
>>
>> Jamsheed
>>
>> On Wednesday 01 November 2017 03:58 AM, Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
>>> Jamsheed, nice test!
>>>
>>> 2 suggestions:
>>>
>>>   (1) Enable the test on all platforms: though the bug is
>>> platform-specific, it doesn't mean the test should be. I don't see
>>> any platform-specific code there and it's beneficial to test other
>>> platforms as well
>>>
>>>   (2) Add some test cases with multiple array parameters.
>>>
>>> Otherwise, looks good.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Vladimir Ivanov
>>>
>>> On 10/31/17 10:37 PM, jamsheed wrote:
>>>> Hi Dean,
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for the review,
>>>>
>>>> tested with a test case, previously it was not working for
>>>> windows-x86, now it works.
>>>>
>>>> revised webrev with test
>>>> case:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.01/
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>> Jamsheed
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday 31 October 2017 02:18 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>>> I think you need a native test for Windows x86 that defines
>>>>> JavaCritical methods with various signatures (especially arrays)
>>>>> to make sure this is working correctly.
>>>>>
>>>>> dl
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/30/17 9:45 AM, jamsheed wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> request for review,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> jbs : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167408
>>>>>>
>>>>>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.00/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (contributed by Ioannis Tsakpinis)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> desc:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- it starts with JavaCritical_ instead of Java_;
>>>>>> -- it does not have extra JNIEnv* and jclass arguments;
>>>>>> -- Java arrays are passed in two arguments: the first is an array
>>>>>> length, and the second is a pointer to raw array data. That is,
>>>>>> no need to call GetArrayElements and friends, you can instantly
>>>>>> use a direct array pointer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> updated arg_size calculation wrt above points.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jamsheed
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [10] JBS: 8167408: Invalid critical JNI function lookup

Vladimir Ivanov
In reply to this post by Jamsheed C m
Looks good.

Best regards,
Vladimir Ivanov

On 11/3/17 6:06 PM, jamsheed wrote:

> Hi Dean, David, Martin, Vladimir,
>
> incorporated most of the suggestions, let me know if this is ok!
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.02/
>
> Best regards
>
> Jamsheed
>
> On Wednesday 01 November 2017 03:58 AM, Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
>> Jamsheed, nice test!
>>
>> 2 suggestions:
>>
>>   (1) Enable the test on all platforms: though the bug is
>> platform-specific, it doesn't mean the test should be. I don't see any
>> platform-specific code there and it's beneficial to test other
>> platforms as well
>>
>>   (2) Add some test cases with multiple array parameters.
>>
>> Otherwise, looks good.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Vladimir Ivanov
>>
>> On 10/31/17 10:37 PM, jamsheed wrote:
>>> Hi Dean,
>>>
>>> Thank you for the review,
>>>
>>> tested with a test case, previously it was not working for
>>> windows-x86, now it works.
>>>
>>> revised webrev with test
>>> case:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.01/
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Jamsheed
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tuesday 31 October 2017 02:18 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>> I think you need a native test for Windows x86 that defines
>>>> JavaCritical methods with various signatures (especially arrays) to
>>>> make sure this is working correctly.
>>>>
>>>> dl
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 10/30/17 9:45 AM, jamsheed wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> request for review,
>>>>>
>>>>> jbs : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167408
>>>>>
>>>>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.00/
>>>>>
>>>>> (contributed by Ioannis Tsakpinis)
>>>>>
>>>>> desc:
>>>>>
>>>>> -- it starts with JavaCritical_ instead of Java_;
>>>>> -- it does not have extra JNIEnv* and jclass arguments;
>>>>> -- Java arrays are passed in two arguments: the first is an array
>>>>> length, and the second is a pointer to raw array data. That is, no
>>>>> need to call GetArrayElements and friends, you can instantly use a
>>>>> direct array pointer.
>>>>>
>>>>> updated arg_size calculation wrt above points.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Jamsheed
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [10] JBS: 8167408: Invalid critical JNI function lookup

Jamsheed C m
Thank you, Vladimir Ivanov

Best regards,

Jamsheed


On Tuesday 07 November 2017 10:00 PM, Vladimir Ivanov wrote:

> Looks good.
>
> Best regards,
> Vladimir Ivanov
>
> On 11/3/17 6:06 PM, jamsheed wrote:
>> Hi Dean, David, Martin, Vladimir,
>>
>> incorporated most of the suggestions, let me know if this is ok!
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.02/
>>
>> Best regards
>>
>> Jamsheed
>>
>> On Wednesday 01 November 2017 03:58 AM, Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
>>> Jamsheed, nice test!
>>>
>>> 2 suggestions:
>>>
>>>   (1) Enable the test on all platforms: though the bug is
>>> platform-specific, it doesn't mean the test should be. I don't see
>>> any platform-specific code there and it's beneficial to test other
>>> platforms as well
>>>
>>>   (2) Add some test cases with multiple array parameters.
>>>
>>> Otherwise, looks good.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Vladimir Ivanov
>>>
>>> On 10/31/17 10:37 PM, jamsheed wrote:
>>>> Hi Dean,
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for the review,
>>>>
>>>> tested with a test case, previously it was not working for
>>>> windows-x86, now it works.
>>>>
>>>> revised webrev with test
>>>> case:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.01/
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>> Jamsheed
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday 31 October 2017 02:18 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>>> I think you need a native test for Windows x86 that defines
>>>>> JavaCritical methods with various signatures (especially arrays)
>>>>> to make sure this is working correctly.
>>>>>
>>>>> dl
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/30/17 9:45 AM, jamsheed wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> request for review,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> jbs : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167408
>>>>>>
>>>>>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8167408/webrev.00/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (contributed by Ioannis Tsakpinis)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> desc:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- it starts with JavaCritical_ instead of Java_;
>>>>>> -- it does not have extra JNIEnv* and jclass arguments;
>>>>>> -- Java arrays are passed in two arguments: the first is an array
>>>>>> length, and the second is a pointer to raw array data. That is,
>>>>>> no need to call GetArrayElements and friends, you can instantly
>>>>>> use a direct array pointer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> updated arg_size calculation wrt above points.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jamsheed
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>