RFR(S): 8160564: TEST: Add a test to check the implementation of VersionProps.versionNumbers()

Alan Bateman Alan.Bateman at oracle.com
Thu Jul 7 18:28:07 UTC 2016

On 07/07/2016 19:05, Martin Buchholz wrote:

> When jdk9 is released, an army of white, black, grey, and red hats will try
> to keep their old Unsafe hacks alive and maybe get their hands on a
> jdk.internal.misc.Unsafe.
I assume these Unsafe usages are sun.misc.Unsafe so they should continue 
to work. More details in JEP 260 [1].

> Here's some code that tries to do that. The call
> to setAccessible succeeds! And the code succeeds in getting hold
> of jdk.internal.misc.Unsafe.class and of its instance before finally
> failing with IllegalAccessError.  So this may actually be safe, in that
> user code may not be able to actually invoke methods on their ill-gotten
> Unsafe object, but the intent is probably that they shouldn't be able to
> get this far:
The behavior you see is expected. Many us would like setAccessible(true) 
to go away but there are many use-cases that would need alternatives first.


[1] http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/260

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list