8348228: Major performance regression in GetMethodDeclaringClass and other JVMTI Method functions

[zhengyu123]

Please review this patch for the parity of Oracle's JDK-8185348.

Oracle's patch is non-public. This patch is based on @sspitsyn's comments in JDK-8185348 and consistent with JDK9's implementation.

Before patch, slowjvmti test case from JDK-8185348:
16366ms

After patch:
3ms

PR for jdk8u-dev has been approved: openjdk/jdk8u-dev#656

---

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
• JDK-8348228 needs maintainer approval

Issue

• JDK-8348228: Major performance regression in GetMethodDeclaringClass and other JVMTI Method functions (Bug - P3)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk8u.git pull/76/head:pull/76
$ git checkout pull/76

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/76
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk8u.git pull/76/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 76

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 76

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk8u/pull/76.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back zgu! 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]

❗ This change is not yet ready to be integrated.
See the Progress checklist in the description for automated requirements.

[mlbridge]

Webrevs

• 00: Full (7f8a2c72)

[jerboaa]

Why is this being requested as a critical patch? The bug exists since 8u112 - so why the sudden urgency? I'd think this warrants more bake time in the development trees as an 8u only bug. Please close this pr and pursue openjdk/jdk8u-dev#656 instead. Thanks!

[zhengyu123]

Why is this being requested as a critical patch? The bug exists since 8u112 - so why the sudden urgency? I'd think this warrants more bake time in the development trees as an 8u only bug. Please close this pr and pursue openjdk/jdk8u-dev#656 instead. Thanks!

Well, I requested 8u-dev backport on 5/30/2025, three weeks ago, have it even considered? since it is significant performance regression.

[jerboaa]

Why is this being requested as a critical patch? The bug exists since 8u112 - so why the sudden urgency? I'd think this warrants more bake time in the development trees as an 8u only bug. Please close this pr and pursue openjdk/jdk8u-dev#656 instead. Thanks!

Well, I requested 8u-dev backport on 5/30/2025, three weeks ago, have it even considered? since it is significant performance regression.

It fell through the cracks. Sorry about that. Next time feel free to contact maintainers directly. Nevertheless this fix doesn't satisfy the critical fix criteria (performance improvement and has been existing for a long time without much notice).