Re: JVMTI retransformation and addition of private methods

[serguei.spit...@oracle.com]

Hi Karen and David, On 2/20/18 19:52, David Holmes wrote: Hi Karen, On 21/02/2018 1:54 AM, Karen Kinnear wrote: Folks, As part of the Valhalla EG discussions for JVMTI changes for nestmates (thank you Serguei and David), IBM brought up a request that we update the JVMTI documentation to reflect that we allow addition of private methods. Is there a reason we do not document this? I’m inviting those who were involved at the time - please include others if needed. I support documenting this in the JVMTI spec and had a plan to fix it in 11. However, it is not clear to me yet if we have a consensus on it. This issue is tracked by: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8192936 "RI does not follow the JVMTI RedefineClasses spec that is too strict in the definition" Yes, this is the one. Thank you, David, for posting the link. As I wrote there ... It is not at all clear how JDK-6404550 morphed into "Permit the adding or deleting of private final/static methods with redefine" - nor why those changes failed to make any change to the spec itself. It is also unclear whether the add/delete is restricted to final/static methods or any private method? I can see that the intent was to only allow something that would not perturb the vtable for existing instances. I agree, there is a confusion somewhere. Is it possible, the JDK-6404550 in JIRA is a different bug than the one in the Bugtraq system? The JDK-6404550 in JIRA has a different synopsis:    https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6404550      Cannot implement late attach in NetBeans Profiler due to missing functionality in JVMTI Thanks, Serguei -- David thanks, Karen