On Fri, 24 Feb 2023 10:04:48 GMT, Dean Wookey <dwoo...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Each time a menu would change scenes, a new set of ListChangeListeners would >> be added to the items in the menu. The bigger problem however is that these >> list change listeners have a strong reference to the scene which is >> potentially a much bigger leak. >> >> The first commit was more straightforward, but there are 2 things that might >> be of concern: >> >> 1. The method removeAcceleratorsFromScene takes in a scene parameter, but >> it'll remove all the ListChangeListeners attached to it, regardless of which >> scene was passed in. Something similar happens with changeListenerMap >> already, so I think it's fine. >> 2. I made the remove method public so that external calls from skins to >> remove the accelerators would remove the ListChangeListener and also because >> all the remove methods are public. >> >> After I wrote more tests I realised using the ObservableLists as keys in the >> WeakHashMaps was a bad idea. If Java had a WeakIdentityHashMap the fix would >> be simple. The fix is in the second commit. >> >> There are still more issues that stem from the fact that for each anchor >> there could be multiple menus and the current code doesn't account for that. >> For example, swapping context menus on a tab doesn't register change >> listeners on the new context menu because the TabPane itself had a scene >> change listener already. These other issues could relate to JDK-8268374 >> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8268374 and JDK-8283449 >> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8283449. One of the issues is related to >> the fact that there's no logic to remove listeners when Tab/TableColumn's >> are removed from their associated control (TabPane, TableView, >> TreeTableView). >> >> I'm looking at these issues, but I think they're dependent on this fix. >> Either I can add to this PR or I can wait to see what comes out of this and >> fix them subsequently. > > Dean Wookey has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > Added more comments and fixed IdentityWrapper hashcode. This fix is quite complicated for sure. This memory leak currently affects us, so we're using an internal build. We would like to see a fix for this get merged in, and there's also a follow-up PR I'd like to do as well. @arapte If the complexity is the issue, we are open to any suggestions for alternative (simpler) fixes. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1037#issuecomment-1531251481
