On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 12:22:52 GMT, Weijun Wang <wei...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> I thought about that but not sure of performance impact. Is the worst problem > that more than one warnings will be printed for a single caller? It's not > really harmless. > > As for the frame, if the warning message only contain the caller class name > and its code source, why is it worth using a key of multiple frames? The > message will look the same. WeakHashMap access synchronization. Whether we need to cache to avoid excessive warnings isn't clear. If the SM is enabled once and never disabled/re-enabled then caching isn't interesting. On the other hand if there are programs that are enabling/disabling to execute subsets of code then maybe it is. Maybe we should just drop this and see if there is any feedback on the repeated warning? ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/4400
