8371: Stacktrace should hide hidden frames

[Suchitainf]

JFR tool is hiding all the hidden frames. But in JMC, Stacktrace view is still showing lot of hidden methods which is not required from the users point of view. Hence, we will be hiding all the hidden frames as part of this enhancement.

Also, we have updated some test cases also in order to get rid of hidden frames which were expected by the test cases.

---

Progress

• Commit message must refer to an issue
• Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Committer)

Issue

• JMC-8371: Stacktrace should hide hidden frames (Enhancement - P3)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jmc.git pull/632/head:pull/632
$ git checkout pull/632

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/632
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jmc.git pull/632/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 632

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 632

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jmc/pull/632.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back schaturvedi! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

[openjdk]

❗ This change is not yet ready to be integrated.
See the Progress checklist in the description for automated requirements.

[mlbridge]

Webrevs

• 01: Full - Incremental (7adc0782)
• 00: Full (4db62bbf)

[egahlin]

• Shouldn't this be something you enable/disable in a preferences dialog?
• Allocating an ArrayList every time a frame is requested seems unnecessary.
• What about the time complexity of iterating through a stack trace? Isn't this now O(n^2) instead of O(n)?

[bridgekeeper]

@Suchitainf This pull request has been inactive for more than 4 weeks and will be automatically closed if another 4 weeks passes without any activity. To avoid this, simply add a new comment to the pull request. Feel free to ask for assistance if you need help with progressing this pull request towards integration!

[egahlin]

Using stream() instead of new ArrayList doesn't change much.

[bridgekeeper]

@Suchitainf This pull request has been inactive for more than 4 weeks and will be automatically closed if another 4 weeks passes without any activity. To avoid this, simply issue a /touch or /keepalive command to the pull request. Feel free to ask for assistance if you need help with progressing this pull request towards integration!

[headius]

Just a note, async-profiler has this feature and it seems to work well there. I am not sure whether it is something they do in the native binding or if it's something they do to post-process, but it helps unify multiple "essentially identical" stacks when they differ only by LambdaForm frames, which is critical for profiling heavy invokedynamic-using libraries and languages (like JRuby).

I'll try to circle back to this and help.