Re: RFR: JDK-8315897: some PrivilegedActions missing in JDK code for getting properties

2023-09-19 Thread Phil Race
On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 08:21:35 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote: > > > So what about FontConfiguration? Is that something using the class > > > directly too? > > > > > > I think this is not needed either. As far as I can see, the instance of > > `FontConfiguration` is created from `doPrivileged`, th

Re: RFR: JDK-8315897: some PrivilegedActions missing in JDK code for getting properties

2023-09-12 Thread Alan Bateman
On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 08:26:59 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote: > So could we remove the existing PrivilegedAction in getCompilerName ? Wouldn't that break ManagementFactory.getCompilationMXBean? - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15629#issuecomment-1715570499

Re: RFR: JDK-8315897: some PrivilegedActions missing in JDK code for getting properties

2023-09-12 Thread Matthias Baesken
On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 13:02:07 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote: > > So probably we could avoid changing VMManagementImpl.java because it is not > > needed any more at least in jdk-head . > > It's a JDK internal class so should never have been used directly. I can't > imagine what might be using a JDK int

Re: RFR: JDK-8315897: some PrivilegedActions missing in JDK code for getting properties

2023-09-12 Thread Matthias Baesken
On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 14:01:24 GMT, Alexey Ivanov wrote: > > So what about FontConfiguration? Is that something using the class directly > > too? > > I think this is not needed either. As far as I can see, the instance of > `FontConfiguration` is created from `doPrivileged`, therefore these two

Re: RFR: JDK-8315897: some PrivilegedActions missing in JDK code for getting properties

2023-09-08 Thread Alexey Ivanov
On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 13:02:07 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote: > So what about FontConfiguration? Is that something using the class directly > too? I think this is not needed either. As far as I can see, the instance of `FontConfiguration` is created from `doPrivileged`, therefore these two system prop

Re: RFR: JDK-8315897: some PrivilegedActions missing in JDK code for getting properties

2023-09-08 Thread Alan Bateman
On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 10:58:23 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote: > So probably we could avoid changing VMManagementImpl.java because it is not > needed any more at least in jdk-head . It's a JDK internal class so should never have been used directly. I can't imagine what might be using a JDK internal

Re: RFR: JDK-8315897: some PrivilegedActions missing in JDK code for getting properties

2023-09-08 Thread Matthias Baesken
On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 08:26:16 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote: > There are some remaining places in 'general' JDK code (= code not related to > e.g. a specific tool) getting properties like : > > osName = System.getProperty(os.name) > > https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/src/java.management/

Re: RFR: JDK-8315897: some PrivilegedActions missing in JDK code for getting properties

2023-09-08 Thread Alan Bateman
On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 08:26:16 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote: > There are some remaining places in 'general' JDK code (= code not related to > e.g. a specific tool) getting properties like : > > osName = System.getProperty(os.name) > > https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/src/java.management/

RFR: JDK-8315897: some PrivilegedActions missing in JDK code for getting properties

2023-09-08 Thread Matthias Baesken
There are some remaining places in 'general' JDK code (= code not related to e.g. a specific tool) getting properties like : osName = System.getProperty(os.name) https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/src/java.management/share/classes/sun/management/VMManagementImpl.java#L225 https://github