On Fri, 13 May 2022 09:43:55 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore <mcimadam...@openjdk.org>
wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/sun/nio/ch/FileChannelImpl.java line 1164:
>>
>>> 1162: }
>>> 1163: if (unmapper != null) {
>>> 1164: AbstractMemorySegmentImpl segment = new
>>> MappedMemorySegmentImpl(unmapper.address(), unmapper, size,
>>
>> When reviewing the method for MappedByteBuffer: I think to make this
>> consistent the "old" method should also use `address()` which applies the
>> pagePosition. Currently it is confusing:
>> - New code returning `MemorySegment` uses `unmapper.address()`
>> - Old code returning `MappedByteBuffer` uses `unmapper.address +
>> unmapper.pagePosition` (fields)
>>
>> Should I open an issue or a PR to fix this (because this is already merged)?
>>
>> See the mailing list posts:
>> - https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/panama-dev/2022-May/016981.html
>> - https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/panama-dev/2022-May/016990.html
>
> Please file an RFE. I suspect that there will be more little improvements and
> consolidation like this we'll want to make to this code.
RFE = issue?
-------------
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7888
