Skip to content

8356942: invokeinterface Throws AbstractMethodError Instead of IncompatibleClassChangeError #26122

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

dholmes-ora
Copy link
Member

@dholmes-ora dholmes-ora commented Jul 3, 2025

In JDK-8186092 (way back in JDK 10) we elided loader constraint checks for overpass methods related to default methods by skipping them when initializing the itable for the interface. But that was the wrong place to do that. The overpass method is setup when there is a resolution/selection error so that the correct exception is thrown if the problematic method is invoked (like the ICCE reporting conflicting methods) and by eliding that entry we instead get the AbstractMethhodError.

The fix here is to revert that change from JDK-8186092, and to address the loader constraint problem by adding the same check for overpass methods in klassItable::check_constraints that exists for klassVtable::check_constraints.

Testing:

  • modified existing regression test
  • tiers 1-4

EDIT: originally there was a new regression test for this, but this area is already covered by the vmTestBase "defmeth tests. That test was missing the necessary invocation modes to expose the bug, so they have been added.

Thanks

PS. The diff is much smaller if you disable whitespace differences.


Progress

  • Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue

Warning

 ⚠️ Found leading lowercase letter in issue title for 8356942: invokeinterface Throws AbstractMethodError Instead of IncompatibleClassChangeError

Issue

  • JDK-8356942: invokeinterface Throws AbstractMethodError Instead of IncompatibleClassChangeError (Bug - P3)

Reviewers

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/26122/head:pull/26122
$ git checkout pull/26122

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/26122
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/26122/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 26122

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 26122

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26122.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Jul 3, 2025

👋 Welcome back dholmes! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jul 3, 2025

@dholmes-ora This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8356942: invokeinterface Throws AbstractMethodError Instead of IncompatibleClassChangeError

Reviewed-by: coleenp

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 159 new commits pushed to the master branch:

As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Jul 3, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jul 3, 2025

@dholmes-ora The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

  • hotspot

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing list. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the hotspot hotspot-dev@openjdk.org label Jul 3, 2025
@dholmes-ora dholmes-ora changed the title 8356942: invokeinterface Throws AbstractMethodError Instead of IncompatibleClassChangeError 8356942: invokeinterface Throws AbstractMethodError Instead of IncompatibleClassChangeError Jul 3, 2025
@dholmes-ora
Copy link
Member Author

/label add hotspot-runtime

@openjdk openjdk bot added the hotspot-runtime hotspot-runtime-dev@openjdk.org label Jul 3, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jul 3, 2025

@dholmes-ora
The hotspot-runtime label was successfully added.

@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Jul 3, 2025

Webrevs

…the invokeinterface variants of the

test scenario. Also updated all tests therein to use `throwsExact` so that the wrong kind of ICCE does not
cause the test to pass by mistake.
Copy link
Contributor

@coleenp coleenp left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Still so many questions...

Copy link
Contributor

@coleenp coleenp left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Jul 8, 2025
@dholmes-ora
Copy link
Member Author

Thanks for the review @coleenp !

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
hotspot hotspot-dev@openjdk.org hotspot-runtime hotspot-runtime-dev@openjdk.org ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants