On Mon, 26 Apr 2021 21:20:57 GMT, Erik Gahlin <egah...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Jaroslav Bachorik has updated the pull request with a new target base due to >> a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes >> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains 13 additional >> commits since the last revision: >> >> - Prevent event container bytecode generation if no container present >> - Fix event metadata >> - Roll back conditional registration of container events >> - Remove container events flag >> - Remove trailing spaces >> - Doh >> - Report container type and register events conditionally >> - Remove unused test files >> - Initial test support for JFR container events >> - Update the JFR control files >> - ... and 3 more: >> https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/c00a534f...04c3f092 > > src/jdk.jfr/share/classes/jdk/jfr/internal/Utils.java line 729: > >> 727: >> 728: public static boolean shouldSkipBytecode(String eventName, Class<?> >> superClass) { >> 729: if >> (!superClass.getName().equals("jdk.jfr.events.AbstractJDKEvent")) { > > Was there a problem checking against the class instance? If so, perhaps you > could add a check that the class is in the boot class loader (null). Yes, `AbstractJDKEvent` is package private so it is not accessible from here. > src/jdk.jfr/share/classes/jdk/jfr/internal/Utils.java line 737: > >> 735: private static Metrics getMetrics() { >> 736: if (metrics == null) { >> 737: metrics = Metrics.systemMetrics(); > > Will this not lead to a lookup every time in an non-container environment? Yes. Now I see why you used `Metrics[]` - will fix. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3126
