I use ASM to update the class stack map, but when asm getMergedType, the following exception occurs:
java.lang.RuntimeException:
java.io.IOException: Resource not found for IntefaceImplA.
If without asm modify the class method, it does work fine.
I have defined two interfaces A and B: IntefaceImplA and
IntefaceImplB.
My environment source code:
IntefaceA.java
public interface IntefaceA {
void inteface();
}
IntefaceImplA.java
public class IntefaceImplA implements IntefaceA {
#Override
public void inteface() {
}
}
IntefaceImplB.java
public class IntefaceImplB implements IntefaceA {
#Override
public void inteface() {
}
}
Test.java
public class Test {
public IntefaceA getImpl(boolean b) {
IntefaceA a = b ? new IntefaceImplA() : new IntefaceImplB();
return a;
}
}
Main.java
public class Main {
public static void main(String args[]) {
....
if (a instance of Test) {
..
...
}
}
}
After I compiled a runner jar, and delete the IntefaceImplA.class and IntefaceA.class manually from the jar. why i wanna to delete those classes files, since the spring always like to do this stuff.
the runner jar can be run normal without ASM, but use Asm will occur exception. since the asm wanna to getMergedType for IntefaceImplA and IntefaceImplB, but IntefaceImplA was deleted by me.
After investigate the ASM ClassWriter source code i found below code:
protected String getCommonSuperClass(String type1, String type2)
{
ClassLoader classLoader = this.getClass().getClassLoader();
Class c;
Class d;
try {
c = Class.forName(type1.replace('/', '.'), false, classLoader);
d = Class.forName(type2.replace('/', '.'), false, classLoader);
} catch (Exception var7) {
throw new RuntimeException(var7.toString());
}
if(c.isAssignableFrom(d)) {
return type1;
} else if(d.isAssignableFrom(c)) {
return type2;
} else if(!c.isInterface() && !d.isInterface()) {
do {
c = c.getSuperclass();
} while(!c.isAssignableFrom(d));
return c.getName().replace('.', '/');
} else {
return "java/lang/Object";
}
}
Actually, I deleted the related class file, the classloader cannot find the class. but without asm the Program does work normal.
Should I enhance the override to the getCommonSuperClass method, if occur exception then return java/lang/Object for it? that's funny
Generally, overriding getCommonSuperClass to use a different strategy, e.g. without loading the class, is a valid use case. As it’s documentation states:
The default implementation of this method loads the two given classes and uses the java.lang.Class methods to find the common super class. It can be overridden to compute this common super type in other ways, in particular without actually loading any class, or to take into account the class that is currently being generated by this ClassWriter, which can of course not be loaded since it is under construction.
Besides the possibility that either or both arguments are classes you are currently constructing (or changing substantially), it might be the case that the context of the code transforming tool is not the context in which the classes will eventually run, so they don’t have to be accessible via Class.forName in that context. Since Class.forName uses the caller’s context, which is ASM’s ClassWriter, it is even possible that ASM can’t access the class despite it is available in the context of the code using ASM (if different class loaders are involved).
Another valid scenario is to have a more efficient way to resolve the request by using already available meta information without actually loading the class.
But, of course, it is not a valid resolution to just return "java/lang/Object". While this is indeed a common super type of every argument, it isn’t necessarily the right type for the code. To stay with your example,
public IntefaceA getImpl(boolean b) {
IntefaceA a = b ? new IntefaceImplA() : new IntefaceImplB();
return a;
}
the common super type of IntefaceImplA and IntefaceImplB is not only required to verify the validity of assigning either type to it, it is also the result type of the conditional expression, which must be assignable to the return type of the method. If you use java/lang/Object as common super type, a verifier will reject the code as it can’t be assignable to IntefaceA.
The original stackmap, very likely reporting IntefaceA as common super, will be accepted by the verifier as that type is identical to the method’s return type, so it can be considered assignable, even without loading the type. The test, whether either, IntefaceImplA and IntefaceImplB, is assignable to that specified common type, might be postponed to the point where these types are actually loaded and since you said, you deleted IntefaceA, this can never happen.
A method whose declared return type is absent, can’t work at all. The only explanation of your observation that “without asm the program does work normal”, is, that this method was never invoked at all during your test. You most probably created a time bomb in your software by deleting classes in use.
It’s not clear why you did this. Your explanation “since the spring always like to do this stuff” is far away from being comprehensible.
But you can use the overriding approach to get the same behavior as with the unmodified code. It just doesn’t work by return java/lang/Object. You could use
#Override
protected String getCommonSuperClass(String type1, String type2) {
if(type1.matches("IntefaceImpl[AB]") && type2.matches("IntefaceImpl[AB]"))
return "IntefaceA";
return super.getCommonSuperClass(type1, type2);
}
Of course, if you deleted more class files, you have to add more special cases.
An entirely different approach is not to use the COMPUTE_FRAMES option. This option implies that ASM will recompute all stack map frames from scratch, which is great for the lazy programmer, but implies a lot of unnecessary work if you are just doing little code transformations on an existing class and, of course, creates the requirement to have a working getCommonSuperClass method.
Without that option, the ClassWriter will just reproduce the frames the ClassReader reports, so all unchanged methods will also have unchanged stack maps. You will have to care about the methods whose code you change, but for a lot of typical code transformation tasks, you can still keep the original frames. E.g. if you just redirect method calls to signature-compatible targets or inject logging statements which leave the stack in the same state it was before them, you can still keep the original frames, which happens automatically. Note the existence of the ClassWriter(ClassReader,int) constructor, which allows an even more efficient transfer of the methods you don’t change.
Only if you change the branch structure or insert code with branches, you have to care for frames. But even then, it’s often worth learning how to do this, as the automatic calculation is quiet expensive while you usually have the necessary information already when doing a code transformation.
Related
I have implemented a Plugin mechanism and language packs using ResourceBundles in Java.
It works perfectly fine if I want to get a ResourceBundle from the core program (not from a plugin).
The problem is that I want to add the possibility to create a ResourceBundle that is in the plugin and only works within the plugin.
Plugins are loaded using URLClassLoaders and Reflections. I cannot access (I don't want to) plugin ClassLoaders from the translation class.
So, the program loads the plugin and executes a method inside the plugin later (The plugin is not in the Classpath) and that plugin executes the translate method.
In order to archieve this, I want to get the ClassLoader Object from the calling method.
Somethng like this or this might be useful, but I don't see a way to get the Class/ClassLoader and not the name of the class.
I thought that I could use the Stacktrace to get the ClassLoader of the calling method but I can only get the name using .getClassName and no Class or ClassLoader Object of the Caller.
This is what I have:
translate
public static String translate(Locale locale,String s) {
for (ResourceBundle bundle : getResourceBundles(locale/*,Thread.currentThread().getStackTrace()[1].getClassLoader();*/)) {
try {
return bundle.getString(s);
}catch (MissingResourceException e) {
//ignore/next iteration
}
}
return s;
}
getResourceBundles
private static Set<ResourceBundle> getResourceBundles(Locale locale,ClassLoader... loaders){
Set<ResourceBundle> bundles=new HashSet<>();
bundles.add(ResourceBundle.getBundle(BASE_NAME,locale,MyClass.class.getClassLoader()));
for (ClassLoader loader : loaders) {
ResourceBundle pluginBundle=getResourceBundle(g,loader);
if (pluginBundle!=null) {
bundles.add(pluginBundle);
}
}
return bundles;
}
I don’t think that this trial and error approach is a good idea. Neither is refetching all bundles for every single string. It doesn’t even seem that this translation service adds a value over the alternative of just letting the plugin read their bundle and call getString on it, at least not a value that justifies the overhead and complexity of the code.
Since the standard ResourceBundle.getBundle methods do already consider the caller’s context, the field declaration and acquisition expression would be a trivial single-liner when being placed within the plugin and invoking getString on it, is not more complicated than invoking your translation service’s method.
For completeness, getting the caller class in a standard way, is possible starting with Java 9. Then, you can do it like
private static final StackWalker STACK_WALKER
= StackWalker.getInstance(StackWalker.Option.RETAIN_CLASS_REFERENCE);
public static String translate(Locale locale, String s) {
for(ResourceBundle bundle: getResourceBundles(locale,
STACK_WALKER.getCallerClass().getClassLoader())) {
try {
return bundle.getString(s);
}catch (MissingResourceException e) {
//ignore/next iteration
}
}
return s;
}
I would need help trying to understand why this is happening to me:
Using Java 1.8.0_131, I have a class such as this:
public class DynamicClassLoadingAppKO {
/*
* THIS VERSION DOES NOT WORK, A ClassNotFoundException IS THROWN BEFORE EVEN EXECUTING main()
*/
// If this method received ChildClassFromLibTwo, everything would work OK!
private static void showMessage(final ParentClassFromLibOne obj) {
System.out.println(obj.message());
}
public static void main(final String[] args) throws Throwable {
try {
final ChildClassFromLibTwo obj = new ChildClassFromLibTwo();
showMessage(obj);
} catch (final Throwable ignored) {
// ignored, we just wanted to use it if it was present
}
System.out.println("This should be displayed, but no :(");
}
}
Two other classes are being used up there: ParentClassFromLibOne and ChildClassFromLibTwo. The latter extends from the former.
There are two external libraries involved:
One library is called libone and contains the ParentClassFromLibOne class. The application includes this library in the classpath both for compiling and executing.
A second library is called libtwo and contains the ChildClassFromLibTwo class. The application includes this library in the classpath for compiling, but not for executing.
As far as I understand, the Java runtime should try to load the ChildClassFromLibTwo (which is not in the classpath at runtime) at this line:
final ChildClassFromLibTwo obj = new ChildClassFromLibTwo();
Given this class is not in the classpath, a ClassNotFoundException should be thrown, and given this line is inside a try...catch (Throwable), the System.out.println line at the end should be executed anyway.
However, what I get is the ClassNotFoundException thrown when the DynamicClassLoadingAppKO itself is loaded, apparently before the main() method is executed at all, and therefore not caught by the try...catch.
What seems more strange to me is that this behaviour disappears and everything works as I would expect if I change the signature of the showMessage() method so that instead of receiving an argument of the parent class, it is directly of the child class:
/*
* THIS VERSION WORKS OK, BECAUSE showMessage RECEIVES THE CHILD CLASS AS A PARAMETER
*/
private static void showMessage(final ChildClassFromLibTwo obj) {
System.out.println(obj.message());
}
How is this possible? What am I missing in the way class loading works?
For testing convenience, I have created a GitHub repository replicating this behaviour [1].
[1] https://github.com/danielfernandez/test-dynamic-class-loading/tree/20170504
OK, the details of why this happens are explained in this Spring Boot ticket [1] which I've been very lucky to be promptly pointed to by Andy Wilkinson. That was definitely a difficult one IMO.
Apparently, what happens in this case is that when the calling class itself is loaded, the verifier kicks in and sees that the showMessage() method receives an argument of type ParentClassFromLibOne. So far so good, and this would not provoke a ClassNotFoundException at this phase even if ParentClassFromLibOne was not in the classpath at runtime.
BUT apparently the verifier also scans method code and notes that there is a call in main() to that showMessage() method. A call that does not pass as an argument a ParentClassFromLibOne, but instead an object of a different class: ChildClassFromLibTwo.
So it is in this case that the verifier does try to load ChildClassFromLibTwo in order to be able to check if it really extends from ParentClassFromLibOne.
Interestingly this wouldn't happen if ParentClassFromLibOne was an interface, because interfaces are treated as Object for assignment.
Also, this does not happen if showMessage(...) directly asks for a ChildClassFromLibTwo as an argument because in such case the verifier does not need to load the child class to check it is compatible... with itself.
Daniel, I'm voting up your answer but I will not mark it as accepted because I consider it fails at explaining the real reason why this is happening at verify time (it's not the class in the signature of the method that's causing the ClassNotFoundException).
[1] https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-boot/issues/8181
This is a bit more complicated than you think. When a class is loaded, all functions are verified. During the verify phase also all referenced classes are loaded, because they are needed to calculated the exact types that are on the stack at any given location in the bytecode.
If you want that lazy behaviour, you have to pass the -noverify option to Java, which will delay the loading of classes until the functions that reference them are executed the first time. But don't use -noverify for security reasons when you don't have full control over the classes that will be loaded into the JVM.
I am trying to test utility method which check if particular class is on class path, if yes return true else return false.
Why I am doing this: I have to independent classes extending same class, and only one of it will be on classpath. Need to do specific thing if one particular is on classpath.
Using kind of below method to check if particular class is on class path.
This check will be done only once after first request.
I'd checked Class.forName() also but decided to go with below approach.
My utility method looks something like this:
public static boolean isMyClassOnClassPath() {
try {
ClassLoader.getSystemClassLoader().loadClass("com.MyClass");
return true;
} catch (ClassNotFoundException ex) {
return false;
}
}
Checking false condition is easy as particular class is not not the ClassPath.
I'm trying to write Junit for positive scenario when this method will return true.
#Test
public void isMyClassOnClassPathShouldReturnTrueWhenMyClassIsOnClassPath() throws Exception{
PowerMockito.mockStatic(MyClass.class);
ClassLoader classLoader = PowerMockito.mock(ClassLoader.class);
PowerMockito.mockStatic(ClassLoader.class);
PowerMockito.when(ClassLoader.getSystemClassLoader()).thenReturn(classLoader);
//trying to mock classLoader.loadClass, below way is incorrect
//PowerMockito.when(classLoader.loadClass("com.MyClass")).thenReturn(Class<java.lang.Object.class>);
Assert.assertTrue(MyClassUtil.isMyClassOnClassPath());
}
So is it possible to mock classLoader.loadClass() method?
Honestly: don't even think about doing something like that.
In short, you are like a person sitting on a tree that starts cutting random limbs of the tree that person is sitting on. Meaning: this is a central part of the JVM. Assume your mocking would work: then every caller to that method would receive your mocked loader! So, when your test case itself wanted to load some classes, it would run into your mock!
And as almost usual, when people claim "I need to user Powermock for xyz" your real problem is a different one: you created untestable code. By making that static call there, you prevent yourself from testing your code!
For starters, you can have a look here to learn how to write testable code. But in case you are curious how you could fix your design:
class ClassPathChecker {
private final ClassLoader classLoader;
ClassPathChecker() { this(ClassLoader.getSystemClassLoader()); }
ClassPathChecker(ClassLoader classLoader) {
this.classLoader = this.classLoader);
}
boolean canClassBeLoaded(String className) {
try {
classLoader.loadClass ...
The above uses dependency injection to insert a mocked ClassLoader; which gives you full control over everything that is going on. Without using Powermock at all.
And out of curiosity: why do you restrict yourself to the System classloader? Wouldn't a simple call like Class.forName("yourclass") tell you the same?
While developing an app in AIDE for Android I have come across this error. The app would compile successfully but wouldn't install, reporting this error:
Could not run the App directly as root. Consider disabling direct running in the settings.
WARNING: linker: app_process has text relocations. This is wasting memory and is a security risk. Please fix.
pkg: /storage/sdcard/AppProjects/MyProgram/bin/MyProgram.apk
Failure [INSTALL_FAILED_DEXOPT]
exit with 0
I researched what could cause this and mainly came across reasons like "certificate error, try resigning the package" and "setting a permission twice in the manifest" and other stuff, none of which have worked.
Your problem: Java thinks you define two methods with the same signature.
Java method signature definition: https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/java/javaOO/methods.html
method declarations have six components, in order:
1.Modifiers—such as public, private, and others you will learn about later.
2.The return type—the data type of the value returned by the method, or void if the method does not return a value.
3.The method name—the rules for field names apply to method names as well, but the convention is a little different.
4.The parameter list in parenthesis—a comma-delimited list of input parameters, preceded by their data types, enclosed by parentheses, ().
If there are no parameters, you must use empty parentheses.
An exception list—to be discussed later.
The method body, enclosed between braces—the method's code, including the declaration of local variables, goes here.
As you can see above, the specification of generic classes is NOT part of the java method signature. Therefore java detects two add-methods with the same signature.
I found where the problem resides. It was in some code which looked very much like this:
public class Builder<T extends Base> {
private final List<Def1> subDefs1 = new ArrayList<>();
private final List<Def2> subDefs2 = new ArrayList<>();
public Builder<T> add(final Collection<Def1> ds) {
subDefs1.addAll(ds);
return this;
}
public Builder<T> add(final Collection<Def2> ds) {
subDefs2.addAll(ds);
return this;
}
}
interface Base {}
final class Def1 implements Base {}
final class Def2 implements Base {}
I had these add methods, which both take a Collection of some kind. The problem must be something to do with Java's lacklustre generics and the dexing process, I guess...
I'm digging through a web application in an effort to fix some problems. The application uses Tomcat, Jersey and Guice. One of the issues is occurring in a MethodInterceptor used for authorization purposes. Here's the method, trimmed to the relevant part:
public Object invoke(MethodInvocation invoc) throws Throwable {
// ...
//Check that the annotation actually exists
if(! invoc.getMethod().getDeclaringClass().isAnnotationPresent(Tool.class))
{
throw new BaseException("...");
}
// ...
}
Now the problem is that some of the "web-facing" methods are inherited from a parent class without being overridden in the child. If I understand getDeclaringClass() correctly, it will return the parent class in this case, but what we really want here is the child class. Some testing seems to confirm this--if I override the method in the child class everything is fine, but if I don't put in the override the exception is thrown.
So, given a MethodInvocation object, is there a way to trace it back to the "actual" class instantiated, rather than the class where the method was declared? Or is some other approach necessary? Worst-case, I could just annotate each method as necessary rather than annotating the class.
Sorry if this is a long-winded question for an easy answer - my Java is pretty rusty.
Simple enough, needed to use getThis().getClass() on the MethodInvocation instead of getMethod().getDeclaringClass():
if(! invoc.getThis().getClass().isAnnotationPresent(Tool.class))
{
throw new BaseException("...");
}
Although in my case, Guice complicated things a bit by putting in an auto-generated child class (e.g., a class name ending in "$$EnhancerByGuice..." That was fixed by moving one up the tree with getSuperclass():
if(! invoc.getThis().getClass().getSuperclass().isAnnotationPresent(Tool.class))
{
throw new BaseException("...");
}
It looks like that the answer is No. I created simple test to check it:
class Run implements Runnable {
#Override
public void run() {
}
}
class Run2 extends Run{}
Method method = Run2.class.getMethods()[0];
System.out.println(method);
As we can see in debug window method doesn't have any information of class Run2:
I guess it would be better to stick on actual methods with its annotations rather then on actual class instances where these methods get invoked.