Re: RFC: AccessController merge

[Gary Benson <gbenson at redhat dot com>]

Andrew Haley wrote:
> Gary Benson writes:
> > Andrew Haley wrote:
> > > I'm a bit concerned about efficiency.  For one example: OK, we
> > > walk the stack -- we have to do that -- but we create a string
> > > for every method name , and the only purpose of doing so AFAICS
> > > is to compare it with "doPrivileged".  We then throw away all of
> > > those strings we so laboriously constructed...
> > 
> > I see what you mean.  Another thing is that if there is a
> > doPrivileged there then a chunk of the generated stack trace will
> > be ignored.  I guess Casey wanted the code he put in stacktrace.cc
> > to be generic.
> > 
> > > I suppose this should go in, but we should study profile data
> > > and make efficiency improvments if required before release.
> > 
> > Should I commit now, or wait for other comments?
> 
> Commit this version, but don't go away and start something else!
> We need something decently efficient.

Ok, committed.  The code won't be called at present anyway, not before
SecurityManager is updated to use it, and even then it won't be called
unless a security manager is in force.  What should I do first, update
SecurityManager, or make AccessController more efficient?

Cheers,
Gary