Re: [RFC/JVMTI] GetMethodDeclaringClass

[Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com>]

Keith Seitz writes:
 > Andrew Haley wrote:
 > 
 > >  > Perhaps I'm being too paranoid?
 > > 
 > > Sure.  I guess you want a debugger to be robust even when the runtime
 > > is FUBAR, but this seems a little extreme.
 > 
 > Okay, one last question... I have implemented the changes as you 
 > suggest, and (of course) they are much, much, much, (much, much, ...) 
 > simpler.
 > 
 >  > AFAICS we just need to make sure that all methods for interpreted
 >  > classes are pushed with _Jv_PushClass.  [snip]
 > 
 > In May 2006, a patch was committed to explicitly exclud interpreted 
 > class methods from showing up in ncodeMap:
 > 
 > 2006-05-31  Alan Modra  <amodra@bigpond.net.au>
 > 
 >          * stacktrace.cc (_Jv_StackTrace::UpdateNCodeMap): Don't add
 >          interpreted classes.

Well spotted.

 > Something about powerpc64-linux stacktrace failures? Original discussion 
 > here:
 > 
 > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2006-q2/msg00261.html
 > 
 > Before I submit this, is this going to be a problem? I don't have access 
 > to a ppc64-linux box (that I know of, at least).

I understand.  Let's not re-introuce this bug.  We could push these
entries into a separate map or maybe when (looking them up during a
stacktrace) check that the result isn't an interpreted class.  Either
would work, and neither is a huge additional overhead.

Andrew.