On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:25:02 GMT, Sonia Zaldana Calles <szald...@openjdk.org> 
wrote:

> Hi folks, 
> 
> This PR aims to fix 
> [JDK-8329581](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8329581). 
> 
> I think the regression got introduced in 
> [JDK-8315458](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8315458). 
> 
> In the issue linked above, 
> [LauncherHelper#getMainType](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/16461/files#diff-108a3a3e3c2d108c8c7f19ea498f641413b7c9239ecd2975a6c27d904c2ba226)
>  got removed to simplify launcher code.
> 
> Previously, we used ```getMainType``` to do the appropriate main method 
> invocation in ```JavaMain```. However, we currently attempt to do all types 
> of main method invocations at the same time 
> [here](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/src/java.base/share/native/libjli/java.c#L623).
>  
> 
> Note how all of these invocations clear the exception reported with 
> [CHECK_EXCEPTION_FAIL](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/140f56718bbbfc31bb0c39255c68568fad285a1f/src/java.base/share/native/libjli/java.c#L390).
>  
> 
> Therefore, if a legitimate exception comes up during one of these 
> invocations, it does not get reported. 
> 
> I propose reintroducing ```LauncherHelper#getMainType``` but I'm looking 
> forward to your suggestions. 
> 
> Cheers, 
> Sonia

My personal comments here:
- I am fine with a solution like this. In 18753, I wanted to avoid a change of 
dynamics between the Java helper and the native part. But if we can change 
that, it looks better. I would suggest to take the test from 18753 though - 
doing a change like this without a test may lead to hard-to-find regressions in 
the future. (Note the current test should guard against both JDK-8329420 and 
JDK-8329581.) Or write a different test.
- as Mandy points out, `LaucherHelper` already reads/has variables for 
"is-static" and "no-arguments" in `validateMainMethod`, so it should be 
possible to just use that values; also as Mandy points out, we can probably get 
rid of `CHECK_EXCEPTION_FAIL` and `CHECK_EXCEPTION_NULL_FAIL`, and use the 
`..._LEAVE` variants, no? (The `..._FAIL` variants where needed so that the 
launcher could continue with the next variant, but since we now only call the 
correct variant, we can just stop if something goes wrong?)

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18786#issuecomment-2063217552

Reply via email to