On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 19:32:29 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> Thanks @egahlin - maybe we can leave it at beginChunk setting then.
>>
>> I've been doing some testing to satisfy myself that the impact of this event
>> on performance is minimal, Running the new `emitInitialSecurityProperties()`
>> is
> New JFR event to record state of initial security properties.
>
> Debug output is also now added for these properties via
> -Djava.security.debug=properties
Sean Coffey has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Check for 0 security even
On Mon, 3 Oct 2022 10:30:54 GMT, Sean Coffey wrote:
>> New JFR event to record state of initial security properties.
>>
>> Debug output is also now added for these properties via
>> -Djava.security.debug=properties
>
> Sean Coffey has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
On Mon, 3 Oct 2022 10:30:54 GMT, Sean Coffey wrote:
>> New JFR event to record state of initial security properties.
>>
>> Debug output is also now added for these properties via
>> -Djava.security.debug=properties
>
> Sean Coffey has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
On Mon, 3 Oct 2022 10:30:54 GMT, Sean Coffey wrote:
>> New JFR event to record state of initial security properties.
>>
>> Debug output is also now added for these properties via
>> -Djava.security.debug=properties
>
> Sean Coffey has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
On Mon, 3 Oct 2022 10:30:54 GMT, Sean Coffey wrote:
>> New JFR event to record state of initial security properties.
>>
>> Debug output is also now added for these properties via
>> -Djava.security.debug=properties
>
> Sean Coffey has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
On Mon, 3 Oct 2022 10:30:54 GMT, Sean Coffey wrote:
>> New JFR event to record state of initial security properties.
>>
>> Debug output is also now added for these properties via
>> -Djava.security.debug=properties
>
> Sean Coffey has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
On Mon, 3 Oct 2022 10:30:54 GMT, Sean Coffey wrote:
>> New JFR event to record state of initial security properties.
>>
>> Debug output is also now added for these properties via
>> -Djava.security.debug=properties
>
> Sean Coffey has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 08:06:45 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>> Sean Coffey has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Check for 0 security events
>
> src/jdk.jfr/share/classes/jdk/jfr/events/InitialSecurityPropertyEvent.java
> line 35:
>
On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 08:04:28 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>> Sean Coffey has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Check for 0 security events
>
> src/jdk.jfr/share/classes/jdk/jfr/events/InitialSecurityPropertyEvent.java
> line 33:
>
On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 11:29:52 GMT, Erik Gahlin wrote:
>> src/jdk.jfr/share/classes/jdk/jfr/events/InitialSecurityPropertyEvent.java
>> line 33:
>>
>>> 31: @Category({"Java Development Kit", "Security"})
>>> 32: @Label("Initial Security Property")
>>> 33: @Name("jdk.InitialSecurityProperty")
>>
On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 07:31:29 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> Sean Coffey has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Check for 0 security events
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/security/ProtectionDomain.java line 76:
>
>> 74: s
On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 14:19:18 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/java/security/ProtectionDomain.java line 76:
>>
>>> 74: static class JavaSecurityAccessImpl implements JavaSecurityAccess {
>>> 75: /* cache a copy for recording purposes */
>>> 76: static Pro
On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 07:19:30 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>> Sean Coffey has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Check for 0 security events
>
> src/jdk.jfr/share/classes/jdk/jfr/events/InitialSecurityPropertyEvent.java
> line 29:
>
On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 19:19:44 GMT, Sean Coffey wrote:
>> Agree, and alternatively, it seems cleaner to add a new SharedSecrets class
>> for `java.security.Security` and remove the dependency on PD.
>
> modified code to have Security class hold the initial properties and provided
> an accessor me
On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 20:54:58 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> modified code to have Security class hold the initial properties and
>> provided an accessor method
>
> What about creating a new `JavaSecurityPropertiesAccess` class and moving the
> accessor method there? It seems it would be cleaner to
On Tue, 11 Oct 2022 11:28:10 GMT, Sean Coffey wrote:
>> What about creating a new `JavaSecurityPropertiesAccess` class and moving
>> the accessor method there? It seems it would be cleaner to remove the
>> dependency on PD in the long run.
>
> @seanjmullan - I looked at that approach. The
> `
On Tue, 11 Oct 2022 12:39:14 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> @seanjmullan - I looked at that approach. The
>> `SharedSecrets.getJavaSecurityAccess().getInitialProperties();` call may
>> trigger early initialization of the `java.security.Security` class - I'm not
>> sure if we want that. Protection
On Tue, 11 Oct 2022 12:39:14 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> @seanjmullan - I looked at that approach. The
>> `SharedSecrets.getJavaSecurityAccess().getInitialProperties();` call may
>> trigger early initialization of the `java.security.Security` class - I'm not
>> sure if we want that. Protection
19 matches
Mail list logo
