From bb882e7249d4b9aa0b0c92ec9058d58464f6ed7a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jason Zaugg Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2016 11:19:34 +1000 Subject: SD-194 Tweak module initialization to comply with JVM spec Top level modules in Scala currently desugar as: ``` class C; object O extends C { toString } ``` ``` public final class O$ extends C { public static final O$ MODULE$; public static {}; Code: 0: new #2 // class O$ 3: invokespecial #12 // Method "":()V 6: return private O$(); Code: 0: aload_0 1: invokespecial #13 // Method C."":()V 4: aload_0 5: putstatic #15 // Field MODULE$:LO$; 8: aload_0 9: invokevirtual #21 // Method java/lang/Object.toString:()Ljava/lang/String; 12: pop 13: return } ``` The static initalizer `` calls the constructor ``, which invokes superclass constructor, assigns `MODULE$= this`, and then runs the remainder of the object's constructor (`toString` in the example above.) It turns out that this relies on a bug in the JVM's verifier: assignment to a static final must occur lexically within the , not from within `` (even if the latter is happens to be called by the former). I'd like to move the assignment to but that would change behaviour of "benign" cyclic references between modules. Example: ``` package p1; class CC { def foo = O.bar}; object O {new CC().foo; def bar = println(1)}; // Exiting paste mode, now interpreting. scala> p1.O 1 ``` This relies on the way that we assign MODULE$ field after the super class constructors are finished, but before the rest of the module constructor is called. Instead, this commit removes the ACC_FINAL bit from the field. It actually wasn't behaving as final at all, precisely the issue that the stricter verifier now alerts us to. ``` scala> :paste -raw // Entering paste mode (ctrl-D to finish) package p1; object O // Exiting paste mode, now interpreting. scala> val O1 = p1.O O1: p1.O.type = p1.O$@ee7d9f1 scala> scala.reflect.ensureAccessible(p1.O.getClass.getDeclaredConstructor()).newInstance() res0: p1.O.type = p1.O$@64cee07 scala> O1 eq p1.O res1: Boolean = false ``` We will still achieve safe publication of the assignment to other threads by virtue of the fact that `` is executed within the scope of an initlization lock, as specified by: https://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jvms/se8/html/jvms-5.html#jvms-5.5 Fixes scala/scala-dev#SD-194 --- src/compiler/scala/tools/nsc/backend/jvm/BCodeSkelBuilder.scala | 9 ++++++++- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'src/compiler') diff --git a/src/compiler/scala/tools/nsc/backend/jvm/BCodeSkelBuilder.scala b/src/compiler/scala/tools/nsc/backend/jvm/BCodeSkelBuilder.scala index d4d532f4df..0dd6058f3e 100644 --- a/src/compiler/scala/tools/nsc/backend/jvm/BCodeSkelBuilder.scala +++ b/src/compiler/scala/tools/nsc/backend/jvm/BCodeSkelBuilder.scala @@ -181,8 +181,15 @@ abstract class BCodeSkelBuilder extends BCodeHelpers { * can-multi-thread */ private def addModuleInstanceField() { + // TODO confirm whether we really don't want ACC_SYNTHETIC nor ACC_DEPRECATED + // SD-194 This can't be FINAL on JVM 1.9+ because we assign it from within the + // instance constructor, not from directly. Assignment from , + // after the constructor has completely finished, seems like the principled + // thing to do, but it would change behaviour when "benign" cyclic references + // between modules exist. + val mods = GenBCode.PublicStatic val fv = - cnode.visitField(GenBCode.PublicStaticFinal, // TODO confirm whether we really don't want ACC_SYNTHETIC nor ACC_DEPRECATED + cnode.visitField(mods, strMODULE_INSTANCE_FIELD, thisBType.descriptor, null, // no java-generic-signature -- cgit v1.2.3