franz1981 commented on code in PR #12163:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/12163#discussion_r872925840
##########
clients/src/main/java/org/apache/kafka/common/utils/Checksums.java:
##########
@@ -40,10 +55,32 @@ public static void update(Checksum checksum, ByteBuffer
buffer, int length) {
public static void update(Checksum checksum, ByteBuffer buffer, int
offset, int length) {
if (buffer.hasArray()) {
checksum.update(buffer.array(), buffer.position() +
buffer.arrayOffset() + offset, length);
- } else {
- int start = buffer.position() + offset;
- for (int i = start; i < start + length; i++)
- checksum.update(buffer.get(i));
+ return;
+ }
+ if (BYTE_BUFFER_UPDATE != null) {
+ final int oldPosition = buffer.position();
+ final int oldLimit = buffer.limit();
+ try {
+ // save a slice to be used to save an allocation in the
hot-path
+ final int start = buffer.position() + offset;
+ buffer.position(0);
+ buffer.limit(start + length);
+ buffer.position(start);
+ BYTE_BUFFER_UPDATE.invokeExact(checksum, buffer);
+ return;
+ } catch (Throwable t) {
+ // fallback
Review Comment:
The problem is the existing `update` signature: `MethodHandle` doesn't know
about the `update` methods and it just assume that any method can raise a
generic `Throwable`, even if it won't happen (as it's in this case).
If I leave the `Throwable` to leak, given that's a checked exception, it's
going to poison the existing code using it: I can wrap it in a generic
`IllegalStateException` and do it
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: jira-unsubscr...@kafka.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
