Hi, trying again, can I please have two reviews on this change? Some small changes after offline discussion.
The webrev is available here: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rbackman/8008357.u1/ Thanks /R On Mar 5, 2013, at 8:07 AM, Rickard Bäckman wrote: > Anyone have time to look at this? > > Thanks > /R > > On Mar 1, 2013, at 10:27 AM, Rickard Bäckman wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> here comes another update to frame.safe_for_sender. >> If the PC at a place where the stack doesn't match the _frame_size we >> sometimes read an invalid return PC. >> In this case we read one that pointed into the Safepoint blob. >> >> We now pretty much guarded for all kind of blobs in safe_for_sender, >> so I've changed the method to not assert in the end but to do it the same >> was as the frame_sparc.cpp did it. Everything that is not >> a nmethod at the end of the method is not safe. >> >> I've also changed another check for a frame_size == 0 to frame_size <= 0 to >> make it somewhat more safer. >> >> The bug: http://bugs.sun.com/view_bug.do?bug_id=8008357 >> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rbackman/8008357/ >> >> This webrev is for HS24. >> >> Thanks >> /R >