RFR: 8268829: Provide an optimized way to walk the stack with Class object only [v5]

[Dan Heidinga]

On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 18:44:14 GMT, Mandy Chung <mchung at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> 8268829: Provide an optimized way to walk the stack with Class object only
>> 
>> `StackWalker::walk` creates one `StackFrame` per frame and the current implementation
>> allocates one `StackFrameInfo` and one `MemberName` objects per frame. Some frameworks
>> like logging may only interest in the Class object but not the method name nor the BCI,
>> for example, filters out its implementation classes to find the caller class.  It's
>> similar to `StackWalker::getCallerClass` but allows a predicate to filter out the element.
>> 
>> This PR proposes to add `StackWalker.Kind` enum to specify the information that a stack walker
>> collects.  If no method information is needed, a `StackWalker` of `CLASS_INFO` can be used
>> instead and such stack walker will save the overhead (1) to extract the method information
>> and (2) the memory used for the stack walking.   In addition, this can also fix
>> 
>> - [8311500](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8311500): StackWalker.getCallerClass() throws UOE if invoked reflectively
>> 
>> New factory methods to take a parameter to specify the kind of stack walker to be created are defined.
>> This provides a simple way for existing code, for example logging frameworks, to take advantage of
>> this enhancement with the least change as it can keep the existing function for traversing
>> `StackFrame`s.
>> 
>> For example: to find the first caller filtering a known list of implementation class,
>> existing code can call `StackWalker::getInstance(CLASS_INFO, ...)` to create a stack walker instance:
>> 
>> 
>>      StackWalker walker = StackWalker.getInstance(Kind.CLASS_INFO, Option.RETAIN_CLASS_REFERENCE);
>>      Optional<Class<?>> callerClass = walker.walk(s ->
>>              s.map(StackFrame::getDeclaringClass)
>>               .filter(interestingClasses::contains)
>>               .findFirst());
>> 
>> 
>> If method information is accessed on the `StackFrame`s produced by this stack walker such as
>> `StackFrame::getMethodName`, then `UnsupportedOperationException` will be thrown.
>> 
>> #### Alternatives Considered
>> One alternative is to provide a new API:
>> `<T> T walkClass(Function<? super Stream<Class<?>, ? extends T> function)`
>> 
>> In this case, the caller would need to pass a function that takes a stream
>> of `Class` object instead of `StackFrame`.  Existing code would have to
>> modify calls to the `walk` method to `walkClass` and the function body.
>> 
>> Another alternative is to add a new `NO_METHOD_INFO` option.  Similar to the proposed API,
>>...
>
> Mandy Chung has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   review feedback and javadoc clean up

src/hotspot/share/classfile/javaClasses.cpp line 2990:

> 2988:     // direct calls for private and/or final non-static methods.
> 2989:     flags |= java_lang_invoke_MemberName::MN_IS_METHOD;
> 2990:   }

Both the is_static and the else block set java_lang_invoke_MemberName::MN_IS_METHOD.  Do we need to differentiate between the two cases or can they be collapsed?

src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/ClassFrameInfo.java line 48:

> 46:     }
> 47:     boolean isHidden() {
> 48:         return SharedSecrets.getJavaLangInvokeAccess().isHiddenMember(flags & MEMBER_INFO_FLAGS);

Is it better to cache the JLIA in a static final similar to what StackFrameInfo does?

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15370#discussion_r1305670313
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15370#discussion_r1305670016