On Thu, 26 May 2022 21:40:42 GMT, Xue-Lei Andrew Fan <xue...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> > Even using a Cleaner is a more overhead than necessary. I would have > > skipped the overhead of a cleaner and Atomic classes with something more > > self contained as a static method: > > I agreed that the using of Cleaner is still heavy, but it may be acceptable > as the code is for testing only. If a new static method is introduced, test > cases using the current API would also need update so as to benefit from it. > I was hesitate for test cases update as it may involve more evaluations (and > risks). But let me check. I evaluated the use of ForceGC (10+ use). It looks like that the update should be straightforward for most of them. Most testing should be placed in case I missed something. I would like to file a new RFE and submit this PR, so that if something is wrong with new update, we could rollback to this. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/8907
