On Thu, 6 Apr 2023 20:47:10 GMT, Chen Liang <li...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> As John Rose has pointed out in this issue, the current j.l.r.Proxy based >> implementation of MethodHandleProxies.asInterface has a few issues: >> 1. Exposes too much information via Proxy supertype (and WrapperInstance >> interface) >> 2. Does not allow future expansion to support SAM[^1] abstract classes >> 3. Slow (in fact, very slow) >> >> This patch addresses all 3 problems: >> 1. It implements proxies with one hidden class for each requested interface >> and replaced WrapperInstance inheritance with an annotation. This can avoid >> unexpected passing of `instanceof`, and avoids the nasty problem of >> exporting a JDK interface to a dynamic module to ensure access. >> 2. This patch obtains already generated classes from a ClassValue by the >> requested interface type; the ClassValue can later be updated to compute >> implementation generation for abstract classes as well. >> 3. This patch's generated hidden classes has call performance on par with >> those of lambda expressions; the creation performance is slightly less than >> that of LambdaMetafactory: >> https://jmh.morethan.io/?gist=fcb946d83ee4ac7386901795ca49b224 >> >> Additionally, an obsolete `ProxyForMethodHandle` test was removed, for it's >> no longer applicable. Tests in `jdk/java/lang/invoke` and >> `jdk/java/lang/reflect` pass. >> >> In addition, I have a question: in >> [8161245](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8161245) it seems some fields >> can be optimized as seen in >> [ciField.cpp](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/6aec6f3a842ead30b26cd31dc57a2ab268f67875/src/hotspot/share/ci/ciField.cpp#L219). >> Does it affect the execution performance of MethodHandle in hidden classes' >> Condy vs. MethodHandle in regular final field in hidden classes? >> >> [^1]: single abstract method > > Chen Liang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > Require an original lookup in constructor arguments to prevent unintended > instantiation I will keep that flag in tests, as otherwise the existence of this dumping feature may not be immediately obvious to investigators. I have implemented defense against a full privilege lookup creating instances of the wrapper with a test case. For the changed loader, my rationale was that all classes involved in the spinning of the wrapper should be already visible to the interface's loader, and should be safe as the target method handle itself doesn't have any knowledge of the wrapper class; does it affect weak hidden class behavior to any extent? ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13197#issuecomment-1499604700
