Request for approval: 8160174: java.net.NetworkInterface - fixes and improvements for network interface listing
Langer, Christoph
christoph.langer at sap.com
Fri Aug 26 11:58:46 UTC 2016
Thanks a lot.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: david buck [mailto:david.buck at oracle.com]
> Sent: Freitag, 26. August 2016 13:36
> To: Seán Coffey <sean.coffey at oracle.com>; Langer, Christoph
> <christoph.langer at sap.com>
> Cc: jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net
> Subject: Re: Request for approval: 8160174: java.net.NetworkInterface - fixes
> and improvements for network interface listing
>
> done
>
> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/jdk/rev/3dc438e0c8e1
>
> Cheers,
> -Buck
>
> On 2016/08/26 16:53, Seán Coffey wrote:
> > Sure, we can push this change.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Sean.
> >
> > On 26 August 2016 07:24:25 GMT+01:00, "Langer, Christoph"
> > <christoph.langer at sap.com> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks Sean and David.
> >
> > Can either of you push it for me as I'm no jdk8 committer?
> >
> > Best regards
> > Christoph
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Sean Coffey [mailto:sean.coffey at oracle.com]
> > Sent: Donnerstag, 25. August 2016 19:10
> > To: Langer, Christoph <christoph.langer at sap.com>; jdk8u-
> > dev at openjdk.java.net
> > Subject: Re: Request for approval: 8160174: java.net
> > <http://java.net>.NetworkInterface - fixes
> > and improvements for network interface listing
> >
> > Approved for jdk8u-dev. David Buck ran your patch through our
> > build &
> > test system (JPRT). No issues spotted.
> >
> > regards
> > Sean.
> >
> >
> > On 24/08/2016 11:51, Langer, Christoph wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > forwarding Chris' review for the downported change.
> >
> > Can I please get the approval now?
> >
> > Thanks
> > Christoph
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Chris Hegarty [mailto:chris.hegarty at oracle.com]
> > Sent: Mittwoch, 24. August 2016 12:04
> > To: Langer, Christoph <christoph.langer at sap.com>
> > Subject: Re: Request for approval: 8160174: java.net
> > <http://java.net>.NetworkInterface -
> >
> > fixes
> >
> > and improvements for network interface listing
> >
> > On 24/08/16 10:23, Langer, Christoph wrote:
> >
> > Hi Chris,
> >
> > so, does it mean you'll give a review for the
> > backport change now?
> >
> > Yes. Consider it reviewed.
> >
> > -Chris.
> >
> > Best regards
> > Christoph
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Langer, Christoph
> > Sent: Montag, 22. August 2016 16:38
> > To: 'Chris Hegarty' <chris.hegarty at oracle.com>
> > Cc: jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net; Rob McKenna
> >
> > <rob.mckenna at oracle.com>
> >
> > Subject: RE: Request for approval: 8160174:
> > java.net <http://java.net>.NetworkInterface -
> >
> > fixes
> >
> > and improvements for network interface listing
> >
> > Hi Chris,
> >
> > yes, the change for 8160174 would make the code
> > mostly identical to the
> > current JDK9 version, except for some calls to
> > NET_ or JNU_
> >
> > macros/functions
> >
> > wich are either not available in 8 or I didn't
> > dare to touch.
> >
> > Best
> > Christoph
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Chris Hegarty
> > [mailto:chris.hegarty at oracle.com]
> > Sent: Montag, 22. August 2016 16:04
> > To: Langer, Christoph <christoph.langer at sap.com>
> > Cc: jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net; Rob McKenna
> >
> > <rob.mckenna at oracle.com>
> >
> > Subject: Re: Request for approval: 8160174:
> > java.net <http://java.net>.NetworkInterface -
> >
> > fixes
> >
> > and improvements for network interface listing
> >
> > Hi Christoph,
> >
> > On 22/08/16 11:00, Langer, Christoph wrote:
> >
> > Hi Chris,
> >
> > I understand your concerns regarding too
> > much change here which
> >
> > could
> >
> > result in subtle differences that might not
> > be wanted for a released
> >
> > version.
> >
> > The main motivation for me to integrate
> > the change into JDK 8 is
> >
> > mergeability. In our SAP JVM 8 we had the
> > need to do several fixes for
> > problems on various of our supported
> > platforms. And with the current
> >
> > coding
> >
> > layout it is very hard to do fixes,
> > especially for AIX/Linux as all the #ifdefs
> >
> > make
> >
> > it a mess. So we already stepped to a
> > version of code that merely
> >
> > matches
> >
> > the
> >
> > JDK9 version.
> >
> > I understand, and can sympathize with this.
> >
> > But I agree that with my proposal
> >
> >
> (http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~clanger/webrevs/8160174.8udev/)
> > I'm
> >
> > probably
> >
> > touching unnecessary places and make a
> > review really hard.
> >
> > Well after further thought, if we are going
> > to make changes here,
> > then maybe there is an argument for keeping
> > the code consistent
> > with 9, at least we end up with a single
> > body of code.
> >
> > 8160174 has been in JDK 9 for almost a
> > month, and there have been
> > no reported issues.
> >
> > Is it the case that with your previous
> > proposal that the 8u version
> > of the file is identical to that of the 9
> > version?
> >
> > -Chris.
> >
> > What about this proposal for downporting
> > the fix to Bug 8158519:
> >
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~clanger/webrevs/8158519.8udev/
> >
> > Here I really only split the
> > enumIPv*Interfaces methods to a clean
> >
> > structure
> >
> > and then make the necessary changes to
> > eliminate getBroadcast() and
> > getSubnet() functions in order to determine
> > that information correctly in
> >
> > place
> >
> > before calling addif.
> >
> > Could you give a review for that?
> >
> > Thanks a lot
> > Christoph
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Chris Hegarty
> > [mailto:chris.hegarty at oracle.com]
> > Sent: Donnerstag, 18. August 2016 17:49
> > To: Langer, Christoph
> > <christoph.langer at sap.com>
> > Cc: jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net; Rob
> > McKenna
> >
> > <rob.mckenna at oracle.com>
> >
> > Subject: Re: Request for approval:
> > 8160174: java.net
> > <http://java.net>.NetworkInterface
> >
> > -
> >
> > fixes
> >
> > and improvements for network
> > interface listing
> >
> > On 16 Aug 2016, at 15:41, Rob
> > McKenna <rob.mckenna at oracle.com>
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > Hi Christoph,
> >
> > If the patch has changed from 9
> > you will need a separate review.
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> > On 16/08/16 10:09, Langer,
> > Christoph wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > can I get approval for
> > backporting the following fix:
> >
> >
> > Original Bug:
> > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-
> 8160174
> >
> > Jdk9 change:
> >
> > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/a8db670c7d12
> >
> > Jdk9 review thread:
> > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-
> >
> > dev/2016-
> >
> > July/010100.html
> >
> >
> > I had to modify the jdk9
> > patch after unshuffling to
> > get it to apply to
> >
> > 8udev.
> >
> > This is the new webrev:
> >
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~clanger/webrevs/8160174.8udev/
> >
> > Wow, there are quite a lot of
> > changes in this. I do remember
> >
> > reviewing
> >
> > this
> >
> > for
> >
> > 9 ( it
> > took a long time ). I do have a
> > concern that this change may cause
> >
> > some
> >
> > subtle
> >
> > behavioural differences, since the
> > underlying systems calls may be
> >
> > different.
> >
> > This
> > may be acceptable for a major
> > release, but not so for an update
> >
> > release.
> >
> >
> > Is there a strong need for this to
> > be backported?
> >
> > -Chris.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Sean.
> >
> > Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
More information about the jdk8u-dev
mailing list