On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 14:47:01 GMT, Michael McMahon <micha...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Hi, >> >> Could I get the following PR review please? It adds a new JDK specific >> extended socket option >> called IP_DONTFRAGMENT, which disables IP packet fragmentation in both IPv4 >> and IPv6 >> UDP sockets (NIO DatagramChannels). For IPv4 in particular, it sets the DF >> (Dont Fragment) bit >> in the IP header. There is no equivalent in the IPv6 packet header as >> fragmentation is implemented >> exclusively by the sending and receiving nodes. >> >> Thanks, >> Michael > > Michael McMahon has updated the pull request incrementally with one > additional commit since the last revision: > > fix whitespace src/jdk.net/windows/native/libextnet/WindowsSocketOptions.c line 112: > 110: return optval; > 111: } > 112: handleError(env, rv, "get option IP_DONTFRAGMENT failed"); Is there some indentation issue here? test/jdk/jdk/net/ExtendedSocketOption/DontFragmentTest.java line 44: > 42: StandardProtocolFamily fam = args[0].equals("ipv4") ? INET : > INET6; > 43: System.out.println("Family = " + fam); > 44: testDatagramChannel(args, fam); Shouldn't there be a testcase for when DatagramChannel is opened using the no arg factory method `DatagramChannel.open()`? test/jdk/jdk/net/ExtendedSocketOption/DontFragmentTest.java line 47: > 45: try (DatagramSocket c = new DatagramSocket()) { > 46: testDatagramSocket(c); > 47: } Can't you test `MulticastSocket` in exactly the same way? Why is there a specific test method for `MulticastSocket`? ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/8245