This commit is contained in:
parent
e7a46aa2a9
commit
1ee8013522
50 changed files with 75 additions and 136 deletions
|
@ -1,13 +0,0 @@
|
|||
== Threat to validity <sec:cl-ttv>
|
||||
|
||||
During the analysis of the ART internals, we made the hypothesis that its different operating modes are equivalent: we analyzed the loading process for classes stored as non-optimized `.dex` format, and not for the pre-compiled `.oat`.
|
||||
It is a reasonable hypothesis to suppose that the two implementations have been produced from the same algorithm using two compilation workflows.
|
||||
Similarly, we assumed that the platform classes stored in `boot.art` are the same as the ones in `BOOTCLASSPATH`.
|
||||
We confirm empirically our hypothesis on an Android Emulator, but we may have missed some edge cases.
|
||||
|
||||
The comparison of Smali code can lead to underestimated values, for example, if the compilation process performs minor modifications such as instruction reordering.
|
||||
The ratios reported in this study for the comparison of code are thus a lower bound and would be higher with a more precise comparison.
|
||||
In addition, platform classes are stored differently in older versions of Android and could not be easily retrieved.
|
||||
For this reason, we did not compared the classes found in applications to their versions older than SDK 32 to avoid producing unreliable statistics for those versions.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue