RFR: 8367067: Improve exception handling in HttpRequest.BodyPublishers

[Volkan Yazici]

On Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:43:47 GMT, Volkan Yazici <vyazici at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Improves exception handling of built-in `HttpClient.BodyPublisher`s to ensure exceptions get propagated in a way compliant with the reactive specification.

> I don't think we need to add new `throws Exception` declarations if the existing code does not need it.

@liach, I've did some cleaning in 89dba9a14cd. Let me know if you were concerned about more places.

@jaikiran, created the [JDK-8367067] sub-task to dedicate this PR to the hardening of exception handling in built-in body publishers – recall that the parent issue, [JDK-8364733], of exceptions leaking for `sendAsync` still needs to be addressed.

I had already removed the duplication in tests, though @dfuch suggested to do the clean-up in a follow-up ticket. Hence,

1. Removed clean-up related changes in fa1a7368fee to keep the PR focused
2. Created the [JDK-8367068] subtask for the clean-up

[JDK-8364733]: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8364733
[JDK-8367067]: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8367067
[JDK-8367068]: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8367068

src/java.net.http/share/classes/jdk/internal/net/http/RequestPublishers.java line 77:

> 75: 
> 76:         private ByteArrayPublisher(byte[] content, int offset, int length, int bufSize) {
> 77:             Objects.checkFromIndexSize(offset, length, content.length);     // Implicit null check on `content`

This check already exists in the `HttpRequest.BodyPublishers#ofByteArray(byte[],int,int)` public API – though duplicating it here since this is the canonical constructor.

src/java.net.http/share/classes/jdk/internal/net/http/RequestPublishers.java line 78:

> 76:         private ByteArrayPublisher(byte[] content, int offset, int length, int bufSize) {
> 77:             Objects.checkFromIndexSize(offset, length, content.length);     // Implicit null check on `content`
> 78:             if (bufSize <= 0) {

New validation to checking on `bufSize`.

src/java.net.http/share/classes/jdk/internal/net/http/RequestPublishers.java line 342:

> 340:                 is.close();
> 341:             } catch (IOException e) {
> 342:                 throw new UncheckedIOException(e);

We don't convert `IOE`s to `UncheckedIOE`s anymore. This effectively makes the `HttpClientImpl::send` exception translation logic branching on `if (throwable instanceof IOException)` to kick in.

src/java.net.http/share/classes/jdk/internal/net/http/RequestPublishers.java line 357:

> 355:                     haveNext = false;
> 356:                     need2Read = false;
> 357:                     throw new IOException(e);

We don't convert `IOE`s to `UncheckedIOE`s anymore. This effectively makes the `HttpClientImpl::send` exception translation logic branching on `if (throwable instanceof IOException)` to kick in.

src/java.net.http/share/classes/jdk/internal/net/http/RequestPublishers.java line 395:

> 393:             Exception exception = null;
> 394:             try {
> 395:                 is = streamSupplier.get();

Fixes leaked `streamSupplier.get()` failures

src/java.net.http/share/classes/jdk/internal/net/http/RequestPublishers.java line 486:

> 484:             } catch (IOException ioe) {
> 485:                 terminated = true;
> 486:                 throw new IOException(ioe);

We don't convert `IOE`s to `UncheckedIOE`s anymore. This effectively makes the `HttpClientImpl::send` exception translation logic branching on `if (throwable instanceof IOException)` to kick in.

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26876#pullrequestreview-3143702796
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26876#issuecomment-3265349702
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26876#discussion_r2329446658
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26876#discussion_r2329449047
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26876#discussion_r2329474662
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26876#discussion_r2329474192
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26876#discussion_r2329441592
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26876#discussion_r2329475172