Hi Ivan,

I went through the changes a bit and I would think it is really a good cleanup 
and will make the future merge of the implementations easier.

One thing I saw was that TwoStacksPlainSocketImpl.c has an #include <malloc.h> 
in line 25. I think that can be removed!?

I had problems importing the patch(set) via mercurial queues - but maybe it is 
an issue of my local mercurial version.

Best regards

> -----Original Message-----
> From: net-dev [mailto:net-dev-boun...@openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of
> Ivan Gerasimov
> Sent: Freitag, 2. März 2018 05:43
> To: Chris Hegarty <chris.hega...@oracle.com>; net-dev@openjdk.java.net
> Subject: RFR [11] 8198358 : Align organization of DualStackPlainSocketImpl
> with TwoStacksPlainSocketImp [win]
> Hello!
> I'd like to do the next step toward removing the TwoStacks socket
> implementation on Windows.
> It would be aligning the two implementations (DualStack and TwoStacks),
> so they can be easier merged together during the next step.
> There are three PlainSocketImpl implementations in JDK:
> java.base/windows/classes/java/net/DualStackPlainSocketImpl.java
> java.base/windows/classes/java/net/TwoStacksPlainSocketImpl.java
> java.base/unix/classes/java/net/PlainSocketImpl.java
> While two later have very similar organization (in particular, set of
> native methods), the former is organized slightly differently.
> In order to merge the two Windows implementation together, they first
> need to be organized in a similar way.
> For consistency, DualStack implementation will be reorganized to be
> aligned with TwoStacks and unix/PlainSocketImpl.
> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8198358
> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/8198358/00/webrev/
> The change looks somewhat messy, but in fact it was a series of
> incremental changes, which I still keep in the mercurial 'mq'.
> (I wish the webrev could be made incremental based on the mq patches, to
> make it easier to review.)
> The patched JDK builds fine and all the regression tests pass Okay.
> Thanks in advance!
> --
> With kind regards,
> Ivan Gerasimov

Reply via email to