Re: RFR: 8268349: Provide more detail in JEP 411 warning messages

2021-06-08 Thread Alan Bateman
On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 18:22:55 GMT, Weijun Wang 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

Re: RFR: 8268349: Provide more detail in JEP 411 warning messages

2021-06-08 Thread Weijun Wang
On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 17:15:29 GMT, Alan Bateman 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

Re: RFR: 8268349: Provide more detail in JEP 411 warning messages

2021-06-08 Thread Alan Bateman
On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 12:22:52 GMT, Weijun Wang 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

Re: RFR: 8268349: Provide more detail in JEP 411 warning messages

2021-06-08 Thread Weijun Wang
On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 06:11:17 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote: >> More loudly and precise warning messages when a security manager is either >> enabled at startup or installed at runtime. > > src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/System.java line 331: > >> 329: >> 330: // Remember original

Re: RFR: 8268349: Provide more detail in JEP 411 warning messages

2021-06-08 Thread Weijun Wang
On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 06:41:11 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote: > > You might want to make your "WARNING" consistent with the VM's "Warning" so > > that OutputAnalyzer's logic to ignore warnings will automatically ignore > > these too. > > The uppercase "WARNING" is intentional here, it was the same

Re: RFR: 8268349: Provide more detail in JEP 411 warning messages

2021-06-08 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Mon, 7 Jun 2021 20:42:53 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote: > More loudly and precise warning messages when a security manager is either > enabled at startup or installed at runtime. Changes to LoggerFinderLoaderTest look reasonable to me. - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/4400

Re: RFR: 8268349: Provide more detail in JEP 411 warning messages

2021-06-08 Thread Alan Bateman
On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 06:30:00 GMT, David Holmes wrote: > You might want to make your "WARNING" consistent with the VM's "Warning" so > that OutputAnalyzer's logic to ignore warnings will automatically ignore > these too. The uppercase "WARNING" is intentional here, it was the same with illegal

Re: RFR: 8268349: Provide more detail in JEP 411 warning messages

2021-06-08 Thread David Holmes
On Mon, 7 Jun 2021 20:42:53 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote: > More loudly and precise warning messages when a security manager is either > enabled at startup or installed at runtime. There are a number of hotspot tests that will trigger this warning, so please ensure they work correctly with the

Re: RFR: 8268349: Provide more detail in JEP 411 warning messages

2021-06-08 Thread Alan Bateman
On Mon, 7 Jun 2021 20:42:53 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote: > More loudly and precise warning messages when a security manager is either > enabled at startup or installed at runtime. Changes requested by alanb (Reviewer). src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/System.java line 331: > 329: > 330:

RFR: 8268349: Provide more detail in JEP 411 warning messages

2021-06-07 Thread Weijun Wang
More loudly and precise warning messages when either a security manager is enabled at startup or installed at runtime. - Commit messages: - 8268349: Provide more detail in JEP 411 warning messages Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/4400/files Webrev: