[cdac] Begin adding MethodDesc APIs to the RuntimeTypeSystem contract

[lambdageek]

Contributes to #99302

This is largely a placeholder just to get the MethodDesc/MethodDescChunk infrastructure in place. To further fill out ValidateMethodDesc and to implement the GetMethodDescData DAC API, I also need to add an executable code manager contract for mapping between native code pointer values and methods. I'd like to do that as a separate PR.

Debugged WinDbg enough to verify that GetMethodDescData is implemented enough to extract the correct MethodTable pointer value from a MethodDesc.

[dotnet-policy-service]

Tagging subscribers to this area: @tommcdon
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

[elinor-fung]

For the existing non-validated types, we only read the parts that are needed to do the validation. For this, we're always going to read everything on MethodDesc/MethodDescChunk - are we expecting to need most of it / do we care about trying to read only what is needed?

[lambdageek]

I think we're going to need to access most of the fields of the MethodDesc base class for validation: you have to compute the MethodDescChunk address right away, and after that the first check is looking at the flags and the slot.

[lambdageek]

Contributes to #99302

This is largely a placeholder just to get the MethodDesc/MethodDescChunk infrastructure in place. To further fill out ValidateMethodDesc and to implement the GetMethodDescData DAC API, I also need to add an executable code manager contract for mapping between native code pointer values and methods. I'd like to do that as a separate PR.

Debugged WinDbg enough to verify that GetMethodDescData is implemented enough to extract the correct MethodTable pointer value from a MethodDesc.

[dotnet-policy-service]

Tagging subscribers to this area: @tommcdon
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

[elinor-fung]

For the existing non-validated types, we only read the parts that are needed to do the validation. For this, we're always going to read everything on MethodDesc/MethodDescChunk - are we expecting to need most of it / do we care about trying to read only what is needed?

[lambdageek]

I think we're going to need to access most of the fields of the MethodDesc base class for validation: you have to compute the MethodDescChunk address right away, and after that the first check is looking at the flags and the slot.

[lambdageek]

Contributes to #99302

This is largely a placeholder just to get the MethodDesc/MethodDescChunk infrastructure in place. To further fill out ValidateMethodDesc and to implement the GetMethodDescData DAC API, I also need to add an executable code manager contract for mapping between native code pointer values and methods. I'd like to do that as a separate PR.

Debugged WinDbg enough to verify that GetMethodDescData is implemented enough to extract the correct MethodTable pointer value from a MethodDesc.

[dotnet-policy-service]

Tagging subscribers to this area: @tommcdon
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

[elinor-fung]

For the existing non-validated types, we only read the parts that are needed to do the validation. For this, we're always going to read everything on MethodDesc/MethodDescChunk - are we expecting to need most of it / do we care about trying to read only what is needed?

[lambdageek]

I think we're going to need to access most of the fields of the MethodDesc base class for validation: you have to compute the MethodDescChunk address right away, and after that the first check is looking at the flags and the slot.

[lambdageek]

Contributes to #99302

This is largely a placeholder just to get the MethodDesc/MethodDescChunk infrastructure in place. To further fill out ValidateMethodDesc and to implement the GetMethodDescData DAC API, I also need to add an executable code manager contract for mapping between native code pointer values and methods. I'd like to do that as a separate PR.

Debugged WinDbg enough to verify that GetMethodDescData is implemented enough to extract the correct MethodTable pointer value from a MethodDesc.

[dotnet-policy-service]

Tagging subscribers to this area: @tommcdon
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

[elinor-fung]

For the existing non-validated types, we only read the parts that are needed to do the validation. For this, we're always going to read everything on MethodDesc/MethodDescChunk - are we expecting to need most of it / do we care about trying to read only what is needed?

[lambdageek]

I think we're going to need to access most of the fields of the MethodDesc base class for validation: you have to compute the MethodDescChunk address right away, and after that the first check is looking at the flags and the slot.

[lambdageek]

Contributes to #99302

This is largely a placeholder just to get the MethodDesc/MethodDescChunk infrastructure in place. To further fill out ValidateMethodDesc and to implement the GetMethodDescData DAC API, I also need to add an executable code manager contract for mapping between native code pointer values and methods. I'd like to do that as a separate PR.

Debugged WinDbg enough to verify that GetMethodDescData is implemented enough to extract the correct MethodTable pointer value from a MethodDesc.

[dotnet-policy-service]

Tagging subscribers to this area: @tommcdon
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

[elinor-fung]

For the existing non-validated types, we only read the parts that are needed to do the validation. For this, we're always going to read everything on MethodDesc/MethodDescChunk - are we expecting to need most of it / do we care about trying to read only what is needed?

[lambdageek]

I think we're going to need to access most of the fields of the MethodDesc base class for validation: you have to compute the MethodDescChunk address right away, and after that the first check is looking at the flags and the slot.

[lambdageek]

Contributes to #99302

This is largely a placeholder just to get the MethodDesc/MethodDescChunk infrastructure in place. To further fill out ValidateMethodDesc and to implement the GetMethodDescData DAC API, I also need to add an executable code manager contract for mapping between native code pointer values and methods. I'd like to do that as a separate PR.

Debugged WinDbg enough to verify that GetMethodDescData is implemented enough to extract the correct MethodTable pointer value from a MethodDesc.

[dotnet-policy-service]

Tagging subscribers to this area: @tommcdon
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

[elinor-fung]

For the existing non-validated types, we only read the parts that are needed to do the validation. For this, we're always going to read everything on MethodDesc/MethodDescChunk - are we expecting to need most of it / do we care about trying to read only what is needed?

[lambdageek]

I think we're going to need to access most of the fields of the MethodDesc base class for validation: you have to compute the MethodDescChunk address right away, and after that the first check is looking at the flags and the slot.

[lambdageek]

Contributes to #99302

This is largely a placeholder just to get the MethodDesc/MethodDescChunk infrastructure in place. To further fill out ValidateMethodDesc and to implement the GetMethodDescData DAC API, I also need to add an executable code manager contract for mapping between native code pointer values and methods. I'd like to do that as a separate PR.

Debugged WinDbg enough to verify that GetMethodDescData is implemented enough to extract the correct MethodTable pointer value from a MethodDesc.

[dotnet-policy-service]

Tagging subscribers to this area: @tommcdon
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

[elinor-fung]

For the existing non-validated types, we only read the parts that are needed to do the validation. For this, we're always going to read everything on MethodDesc/MethodDescChunk - are we expecting to need most of it / do we care about trying to read only what is needed?

[lambdageek]

I think we're going to need to access most of the fields of the MethodDesc base class for validation: you have to compute the MethodDescChunk address right away, and after that the first check is looking at the flags and the slot.

[lambdageek]

Contributes to #99302

This is largely a placeholder just to get the MethodDesc/MethodDescChunk infrastructure in place. To further fill out ValidateMethodDesc and to implement the GetMethodDescData DAC API, I also need to add an executable code manager contract for mapping between native code pointer values and methods. I'd like to do that as a separate PR.

Debugged WinDbg enough to verify that GetMethodDescData is implemented enough to extract the correct MethodTable pointer value from a MethodDesc.

[dotnet-policy-service]

Tagging subscribers to this area: @tommcdon
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

[elinor-fung]

For the existing non-validated types, we only read the parts that are needed to do the validation. For this, we're always going to read everything on MethodDesc/MethodDescChunk - are we expecting to need most of it / do we care about trying to read only what is needed?

[lambdageek]

I think we're going to need to access most of the fields of the MethodDesc base class for validation: you have to compute the MethodDescChunk address right away, and after that the first check is looking at the flags and the slot.