You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@harmony.apache.org by "Elford, Chris L" <ch...@intel.com> on 2008/04/14 18:14:12 UTC
RE: [drlvm][verifier] Using the Harmony verifier code for computing the StackMapTable attribute
Hi all,
It looks like there hasn't been an update on the list about this in a
while. After some initial successes with these JIRAs, the guys working
on the Eclipse TPTP project (http://eclipse.org/tptp) decided to pursue
using this Harmony component to provide StackMapTable attribute
computation for bytecode instrumentation of Java6+ classes. We went
thru the Eclipse legal process
(http://www.eclipse.org/projects/dev_process/ip-process-in-cartoons.php
and
http://dev.eclipse.org/viewcvs/index.cgi/www/legal/EclipseLegalProcessPo
ster.pdf?hideattic=0&root=Eclipse_Website&view=log) for permission to
consume part of Harmony's M5 binary milestone release: verifier.lib and
associated headers out of the HDK.
We were planning to try to integrate the technology into TPTP 4.5 (to
be released in June
http://www.eclipse.org/tptp/home/project_info/devplans/Eclipse%20TPTP%20
Project%204.5%20Release%20Plan.htm) as part of the Eclipse 3.4 Ganymede
release (http://wiki.eclipse.org/Ganymede). Asaf talked about this on
the list sometime last year. Unfortunately, though we got some
promising results, we ran into a few snags with the version in Harmony
M5. In particular, lack of necessary headers in the HDK release, a few
unhandled boundary conditions, etc. Unfortunately, we only acquired
permission from Eclipse legal to use the M5 binary release so the fixes
that are now in JIRA or head are unusable by us at this time.
We can go back to the Eclipse legal for permission to use another
release/milestone of Harmony. The question is whether there is going to
be another Harmony milestone soon enough to allow this process to happen
(hopefully successfully). It may already be too late to get an updated
release/milestone reviewed, approved, and integrated but the Eclipse
legal folks tell us that it is not impossible.
I know you guys have been doing milestones every few months lately and
the last one was at the end of Feb. Is there an updated milestone
upcoming soon (i.e., in the next 2-4 weeks?).
Regards,
Chris Elford
Eclipse TPTP PMC member
and my other identity:
Chris Elford
Intel Software Solutions Group
-----Original Message-----
From: Asaf Yaffe [mailto:asaf_yaffe@yahoo.com]
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 12:07 AM
To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Subject: Re: [drlvm][verifier] Using the Harmony verifier code for
computing the StackMapTable attribute
Hi Mikhail,
Thanks for the update. I'll let you know if I have any questions.
Regards,
Asaf
----- Original Message ----
From: Mikhail Loenko <ml...@gmail.com>
To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2007 1:48:03 PM
Subject: Re: [drlvm][verifier] Using the Harmony verifier code for
computing the StackMapTable attribute
Hi Asaf
I think we can start to play with implementation in your environment
So initial implementation to play with is submitted here
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-5142
(to try it one need first to apply fix.patch from
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-5141)
The issue description (I mean 5142) contains current usage (it might
be changed of course)
Implementation code is not yet well commented, I'm going to work on
this coming week.
How it was tested: I hacked java6 verifier so that before verification
of each java6 class original stackmap table is replaced with what I
produce, then pass control back to the original java6 verifier:
Eclipse 3.3 compiled with javac6 worked just fine
Comments/suggestions are welcome
Thanks,
Mikhail
________________________________________________________________________
____________
Get easy, one-click access to your favorites.
Make Yahoo! your homepage.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Re: [drlvm][verifier] Using the Harmony verifier code for computing the StackMapTable attribute
Posted by Stepan Mishura <st...@gmail.com>.
On 4/14/08, Elford, Chris L <ch...@intel.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> It looks like there hasn't been an update on the list about this in a
> while. After some initial successes with these JIRAs, the guys working
> on the Eclipse TPTP project (http://eclipse.org/tptp) decided to pursue
> using this Harmony component to provide StackMapTable attribute
> computation for bytecode instrumentation of Java6+ classes. We went
> thru the Eclipse legal process
> (http://www.eclipse.org/projects/dev_process/ip-process-in-cartoons.php
> and
> http://dev.eclipse.org/viewcvs/index.cgi/www/legal/EclipseLegalProcessPo
> ster.pdf?hideattic=0&root=Eclipse_Website&view=log) for permission to
> consume part of Harmony's M5 binary milestone release: verifier.lib and
> associated headers out of the HDK.
>
> We were planning to try to integrate the technology into TPTP 4.5 (to
> be released in June
> http://www.eclipse.org/tptp/home/project_info/devplans/Eclipse%20TPTP%20
> Project%204.5%20Release%20Plan.htm) as part of the Eclipse 3.4 Ganymede
> release (http://wiki.eclipse.org/Ganymede). Asaf talked about this on
> the list sometime last year. Unfortunately, though we got some
> promising results, we ran into a few snags with the version in Harmony
> M5. In particular, lack of necessary headers in the HDK release, a few
> unhandled boundary conditions, etc. Unfortunately, we only acquired
> permission from Eclipse legal to use the M5 binary release so the fixes
> that are now in JIRA or head are unusable by us at this time.
>
> We can go back to the Eclipse legal for permission to use another
> release/milestone of Harmony. The question is whether there is going to
> be another Harmony milestone soon enough to allow this process to happen
> (hopefully successfully). It may already be too late to get an updated
> release/milestone reviewed, approved, and integrated but the Eclipse
> legal folks tell us that it is not impossible.
>
> I know you guys have been doing milestones every few months lately and
> the last one was at the end of Feb. Is there an updated milestone
> upcoming soon (i.e., in the next 2-4 weeks?).
>
We scheduled M6 to mid-May. I believe that it is possible to shift it
to the end of April/beginning of May.
-Stepan.
> Regards,
> Chris Elford
> Eclipse TPTP PMC member
>
> and my other identity:
>
> Chris Elford
> Intel Software Solutions Group
>
<SNIP>
RE: [drlvm][verifier] Using the Harmony verifier code for computing the StackMapTable attribute
Posted by "Elford, Chris L" <ch...@intel.com>.
> Wouldn't it be possible for your legals to verify _Harmony_, and not
> just some specific SVN tag, and thus in effect set up some kind of
> trust-relationship between you two? Maybe with yearly reviews or
> something..?
I wish... :-) As I understand it, the process is set up because the different possible sources of 3rd party content may have different expectations on what constitutes acceptable due diligence. I imagine it would be possible for Eclipse and Apache to negotiate some sort of commons between the policies and approaches (since they are both fairly rigorous) but that does not exist today and would probably, unfortunately, take some serious doing to arrange.
_In general_, if an Eclipse project uses a 3rd party component, they will probably only update it from release to release when a desirable feature comes online and not continuously. AFAIK, for better or worse, there is no mechanism for continuous due diligence of 3rd party components coming into Eclipse today and the 3rd party component needs to be locked down into a released state to be formally approved for inclusion in an Eclipse project release. There is a bit more flexibility during the engineering phase where a contributor is evaluating such inclusion but the release itself forces a checkpoint.
In Eclipseland, it is possible to request approval to use _modified_ 3rd party content (we considered this approach) but as I understand it, this only approves splitting the codebase of the 3rd party content (i.e., Harmony verifier in this case) and doing the modifications under an Eclipse license in the Eclipse project from there on. Splitting Harmony is not really a goal. I don't think right now there is a mode to allow Eclipse and 3rd party content to evolve in parallel (except possibly for projects in incubation) which provides a bit more flexibility.
Thanks,
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: Endre Stølsvik [mailto:Endre@stolsvik.com]
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 11:52 AM
To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Cc: Yaffe, Asaf
Subject: Re: [drlvm][verifier] Using the Harmony verifier code for computing the StackMapTable attribute
Elford, Chris L wrote:
> Hi Endre,
Hi Chris, thanks for taking the time to answer that rant!
>
> In addition to providing a great license :-), Eclipse Foundation
> manages a set of open source projects... Kindof like Apache. For those
> projects managed directly in Eclipse, the foundation does IP review of
> any 3rd party content coming into the project.
As do Apache..
> I'm not a lawyer so I
> don't know all the ends and outs and I don't know the exact set of
> checks that are performed. I do know the source code is reviewed via
> some mechanism though. Review depends on the source of the material but
> always happens EVEN for integration of components with a compatible
> license such as Apache.
The thing that I really found amazing is that this review have to happen
for a project that already, AFAIU, was reviewed. As you wrote it, it
seems like a full, new round of whatever has to happen on each and every
check-in into Harmony's SVN. This is seriously weird, IMO.
Wouldn't it be possible for your legals to verify _Harmony_, and not
just some specific SVN tag, and thus in effect set up some kind of
trust-relationship between you two? Maybe with yearly reviews or
something..?
Regards,
Endre.
Re: [drlvm][verifier] Using the Harmony verifier code for computing
the StackMapTable attribute
Posted by Endre Stølsvik <En...@stolsvik.com>.
Elford, Chris L wrote:
> Hi Endre,
Hi Chris, thanks for taking the time to answer that rant!
>
> In addition to providing a great license :-), Eclipse Foundation
> manages a set of open source projects... Kindof like Apache. For those
> projects managed directly in Eclipse, the foundation does IP review of
> any 3rd party content coming into the project.
As do Apache..
> I'm not a lawyer so I
> don't know all the ends and outs and I don't know the exact set of
> checks that are performed. I do know the source code is reviewed via
> some mechanism though. Review depends on the source of the material but
> always happens EVEN for integration of components with a compatible
> license such as Apache.
The thing that I really found amazing is that this review have to happen
for a project that already, AFAIU, was reviewed. As you wrote it, it
seems like a full, new round of whatever has to happen on each and every
check-in into Harmony's SVN. This is seriously weird, IMO.
Wouldn't it be possible for your legals to verify _Harmony_, and not
just some specific SVN tag, and thus in effect set up some kind of
trust-relationship between you two? Maybe with yearly reviews or
something..?
Regards,
Endre.
RE: [drlvm][verifier] Using the Harmony verifier code for computing the StackMapTable attribute
Posted by "Elford, Chris L" <ch...@intel.com>.
Hi Endre,
In addition to providing a great license :-), Eclipse Foundation manages a set of open source projects... Kindof like Apache. For those projects managed directly in Eclipse, the foundation does IP review of any 3rd party content coming into the project. I'm not a lawyer so I don't know all the ends and outs and I don't know the exact set of checks that are performed. I do know the source code is reviewed via some mechanism though. Review depends on the source of the material but always happens EVEN for integration of components with a compatible license such as Apache.
The two links I put in my previous post: <http://www.eclipse.org/projects/dev_process/ip-process-in-cartoons.php>
and
<http://dev.eclipse.org/viewcvs/index.cgi/www/legal/EclipseLegalProcessPoster.pdf?hideattic=0&root=Eclipse_Website&view=log> provide more detail on the Eclipse side of the process. I can say that they don't really review 3rd party content continuously, they just review the specific releases of the 3rd party content that are intended to be consumed by Eclipse projects.
Sure, there is some pain involved here... Eclipse has started a new project (Orbit) to try to pull together a lot of the more common 3rd party components used by Eclipse projects. This particular request is not part of Orbit but it might be a good place to look for more details about Eclipse processes in this area if you're interested. See http://www.eclipse.org/orbit.
Regards,
Chris Elford
Intel Software Solutions Group
And the alter ego:
Chris Elford
Eclipse TPTP PMC member
-----Original Message-----
From: Endre Stølsvik [mailto:Endre@stolsvik.com]
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 10:05 AM
To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Cc: Yaffe, Asaf
Subject: Re: [drlvm][verifier] Using the Harmony verifier code for computing the StackMapTable attribute
Elford, Chris L wrote:
>
> Unfortunately, we only acquired
> permission from Eclipse legal to use the M5 binary release so the fixes
> that are now in JIRA or head are unusable by us at this time.
>
> We can go back to the Eclipse legal for permission to use another
> release/milestone of Harmony.
Seriously?!? What are these guys? Simply and only out to create work for
themselves? We're talking about two serious open source projects here,
and the Eclipse _legal_ have to review .. what, exactly? .. between
milestone builds? What, specifically, do they _do_ during this review?
Read, line by line, the SVN log or something?
(Be kind and note CAREFULLY: I have NOTHING to do with with Harmony -
I'm just lurking around on these lists. I just found this post ..
fascinating.)
Endre.
Re: [drlvm][verifier] Using the Harmony verifier code for computing
the StackMapTable attribute
Posted by Endre Stølsvik <En...@stolsvik.com>.
Elford, Chris L wrote:
>
> Unfortunately, we only acquired
> permission from Eclipse legal to use the M5 binary release so the fixes
> that are now in JIRA or head are unusable by us at this time.
>
> We can go back to the Eclipse legal for permission to use another
> release/milestone of Harmony.
Seriously?!? What are these guys? Simply and only out to create work for
themselves? We're talking about two serious open source projects here,
and the Eclipse _legal_ have to review .. what, exactly? .. between
milestone builds? What, specifically, do they _do_ during this review?
Read, line by line, the SVN log or something?
(Be kind and note CAREFULLY: I have NOTHING to do with with Harmony -
I'm just lurking around on these lists. I just found this post ..
fascinating.)
Endre.