RFR: 8351339: WebSocket::sendBinary assume that user supplied buffers are BIG_ENDIAN [v4]

[Michael McMahon]

On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 07:52:43 GMT, Volkan Yazici <vyazici at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Fixes endian handling `jdk.internal.net.http.websocket.Frame.Masker`.
>> 
>> ### Implementation notes
>> 
>> I deleted the `Frame` clone in tests, and rewired the test code depending on it to the actual `Frame`. To enable this, I relaxed the visibility of the actual `Frame`. I guess the `Frame` clone was introduced to have strict visibility in the actual `Frame`. Though this is not needed since the actual `Frame` is in an internal package. Plus, the fact that bug is in the `Frame` class hints in the direction that there should be one `Frame`.
>
> Volkan Yazici has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Apply review feedback on naming in `Masker`
>   
>   `reset` -> `setMask`
>   `initGallopingMask` -> `initVectorMask`
>   `applyGallopingMask` -> `applyVectorMask`

Just a few minor suggestions for comment changes. But, otherwise looks good.

src/java.net.http/share/classes/jdk/internal/net/http/websocket/Frame.java line 145:

> 143: 
> 144:         /**
> 145:          * Positions the {@link #offset} at 0, which is needed for vectorized masking, by masking necessary amount of bytes.

Suggestion:

         * Applies up to 3 remaining from the previous pass bytes of the mask and
         * positions the {@link #offset} at 0, which is needed for vectorized masking, 
         * by masking necessary amount of bytes.

src/java.net.http/share/classes/jdk/internal/net/http/websocket/Frame.java line 164:

> 162: 
> 163:         /*
> 164:          * Masks one {@code long} at a time.

Suggestion:

         * Masks one {@code long} (mask + mask) at a time.

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/24033#pullrequestreview-2705550187
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/24033#discussion_r2007375437
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/24033#discussion_r2007359979