Yes, please. And it looks fine. We have an internal static code analysis tool
which should catch this sort of thing but it is weakest on Windows ..

-phil.

On 5/30/18, 7:11 AM, Baesken, Matthias wrote:

Hi  Christoph, Sergey and Thomas , thanks for the reviews .

  * And make sure you push it to the client repo...
 *

Thanks for pointing this out, otherwise I would have taken the normal jdk repo .

Best regards, Matthias

*From:*Langer, Christoph
*Sent:* Mittwoch, 30. Mai 2018 16:01
*To:* Baesken, Matthias <[email protected]>; 2d-dev <[email protected]> *Subject:* RE: [XS] RFR : JDK-8204085: avoid printing uninitialized pointer in java.desktop/windows/native/libawt/java2d/windows/GDIWindowSurfaceData.cpp

Hi Matthias,

maybe the code would become nicer if you do it like this:

...

jobject localObj = env->NewLocalRef(wsdo->peer);

PDATA pData = localObj == NULL ? NULL : JNI_GET_PDATA(localObj);

if (pData == NULL) {

...

But the change is very trivial and I would be fine with it, as you did in the webrev. Do whatever is more convenient to you, no need for another webrev.

And make sure you push it to the client repo...

Best regards

Christoph

*From:*Baesken, Matthias
*Sent:* Mittwoch, 30. Mai 2018 15:33
*To:* 2d-dev <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
*Cc:* Langer, Christoph <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> *Subject:* [XS] RFR : JDK-8204085: avoid printing uninitialized pointer in java.desktop/windows/native/libawt/java2d/windows/GDIWindowSurfaceData.cpp

Hi could I please get reviews for this very small change :

In java.desktop/windows/native/libawt/java2d/windows/GDIWindowSurfaceData.cpp , function GDIWindowSurfaceData_GetComp,

we might print pointer pData in uninitialized state.

This occurs in case localObj == NULL , then we would print pData without initialization.

The small fix adds initialization to  pData  :

Bug:

https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8204085

change :

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mbaesken/webrevs/8204085/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Embaesken/webrevs/8204085/>

Thanks, Matthias

Reply via email to