Hello,
while investigating a Memory leak fix from IBM (IJ05380 is in 8.0.5.20 but not
in 8u yet) I noticed that the (fixed) code registerWithClassLoader(Level) in
the master queries a unused class name (pn) and it can use the method reference
instead of Lambda. See patch below.
There seems to be also a opportunity to use computeIfAbsent in a unrelated
method add(Level), not sure if this is wanted, what do you think?
index dbc27124d33..401c6dc73e0 100644
--- a/src/java.logging/share/classes/java/util/logging/Level.java
+++ b/src/java.logging/share/classes/java/util/logging/Level.java
@@ -610,10 +610,7 @@ public class Level implements java.io.Serializable {
}
private static void registerWithClassLoader(Level customLevel) {
- PrivilegedAction<ClassLoader> pa =
- () -> customLevel.getClass().getClassLoader();
- PrivilegedAction<String> pn = customLevel.getClass()::getName;
- final String name = AccessController.doPrivileged(pn);
+ PrivilegedAction<ClassLoader> pa =
customLevel.getClass()::getClassLoader;
final ClassLoader cl = AccessController.doPrivileged(pa);
CUSTOM_LEVEL_CLV.computeIfAbsent(cl, (c, v) -> new ArrayList<>())
.add(customLevel);
@@ -624,19 +621,10 @@ public class Level implements java.io.Serializable {
// the mirroredLevel object is always added to the list
// before the custom Level instance
KnownLevel o = new KnownLevel(l);
- List<KnownLevel> list = nameToLevels.get(l.name);
- if (list == null) {
- list = new ArrayList<>();
- nameToLevels.put(l.name, list);
- }
- list.add(o);
-
- list = intToLevels.get(l.value);
- if (list == null) {
- list = new ArrayList<>();
- intToLevels.put(l.value, list);
- }
- list.add(o);
+ nameToLevels.computeIfAbsent(l.name, (k) -> new ArrayList<>())
+ .add(o);
+ intToLevels.computeIfAbsent(l.value, (k) -> new ArrayList<>())
+ .add(o);
// keep the custom level reachable from its class loader
// This will ensure that custom level values are not GC'ed
I am happy if anyone can sponsor this change.
BTW: I get a synthetic Accessor warning on l.name/value, is this what nestmates
will resolve – is it worth adjusting the modifiers for those fields anyway?
Gruss
Bernd
--
http://bernd.eckenfels.net
