On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 06:35:09 GMT, Jaikiran Pai <j...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> Can I please get a review of this change which addresses the issue noted in > https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8358456? > > In Java 24, through https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8341597 we did a > change which started using the "compressed size" field value for computing a > input buffer size for the `InflaterInputStream`. The change was reasonable. > One part of the change removed a check for ` <= 0` which would have taken > into account invalid/unexpected "compressed size" values: > From https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/21379 >> There is a check for size <= 0. This condition is unreachable in the current >> code and in the PR as well, since the compressed size will always be >= 2. I >> propose we remove this check. > > Without that check, the computed input buffer size can end up being `<= 0` > which is an invalid value for a buffer size and thus results in an > `IllegalArgumentException` from the `InflaterInputStream` constructor. > > My initial thought was to catch the the `IllegalArgumentException` and > rethrow a `ZipException`, but thinking about it, this clearly is more an > issue with the value that we computed as an input buffer size. So I believe > the right thing here is to reintroduce the check that was previously in place > and in such cases just default to reasonable sized buffer. That's what the > commit in this PR does. Additionally, I renamed that variable to > `inputBufSize` to be clear what this `size` represents. > > A new jtreg test has been introduced which reproduces the issue and verifies > the fix. tier testing is currently in progress. > > P.S: As a separate task we might want to do a similar change as what was done > in JDK-8341597, to the `ZipFileSystem` code. It currently uses the > uncompressed size of the entry to decide the input buffer size. Would be interesting to know what kind of tooling produced this invalid/surprising compressed size. The JBS issues do indicate this from what I can tell. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25606#issuecomment-2934344795
