RFR: 8358107: Rollback JDK-8357299 changeset

[Prasanta Sadhukhan]

On Fri, 30 May 2025 04:11:36 GMT, Sergey Bylokhov <serb at openjdk.org> wrote:

> The patch for [JDK-8357299](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8357299) does not completely fix the regression it was intended to address. Instead of bailing out on overflow, it introduces additional logic around src and clip, which might lead to attempts to draw invalid source pixels.
> 
> A test case demonstrating the issue is attached to [JDK-8358103](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8358103)(passed on jdk22 failed on latest openjdk/jdk).
> 
> There are some unresolved discussions related to that patch, see [PR](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25340). I believe it would be better to bail out early in case of overflow than risk incorrect calculations. 
> 
> Therefore, I propose reverting [JDK-8357299](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8357299) until a proper fix is available. This approach would also simplify backports, since only the patch for [JDK-8358103](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8358103) would need to be backported
> 
> @prsadhuk, @prrace please take a look

Marked as reviewed by psadhukhan (Reviewer).

> A test case demonstrating the issue is attached to [JDK-8358103](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8358103)(passed on jdk22 failed on latest openjdk/jdk).

I believe this new testcase is also failing with jdk24.0.1 too where UNSAFE_TO_ADD macro was added for overflow check and caused [JDK-8357299](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8357299) issue so both testcase is failing with jdk24.0.1
but if you feel the earlier bailout is better than this, then it's ok.

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25537#pullrequestreview-2880172293
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25537#issuecomment-2921224425