Hi Srividya, thanks for doing this work.
Change looks good from my side, except for a small indentation flaw in lines 91 and 94 and the copyright year that needs to be adjusted. But I can fix this when I push it. Let's wait for another review (Chris) before we can push it. I'll also do some testing. I'll also take care of the backport after the push to jdk11. Best regards Christoph From: Srividya Shamaiah [mailto:ssham...@in.ibm.com] Sent: Montag, 16. April 2018 10:44 To: Langer, Christoph <christoph.lan...@sap.com> Cc: Chris Hegarty <chris.hega...@oracle.com>; OpenJDK Network Dev list <net-dev@openjdk.java.net> Subject: RFR(XS): 8201369: Inet4AddressImpl_getLocalHostName reverse lookup on Solaris only Hi Chris, Please review the attached patch in http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mhorie/8201369/webrev/ Can you also backport this to JDK 8, we have customers waiting for this fix at JDK 8 level. Thanks, Srividya S [Inactive hide details for Srividya Shamaiah---11/04/2018 03:35:38 PM---Thanks Chris , As you suggested, I will provide the patc]Srividya Shamaiah---11/04/2018 03:35:38 PM---Thanks Chris , As you suggested, I will provide the patch based on jdk 11. Thanks, From: Srividya Shamaiah/India/IBM To: "Langer, Christoph" <christoph.lan...@sap.com<mailto:christoph.lan...@sap.com>> Cc: Chris Hegarty <chris.hega...@oracle.com<mailto:chris.hega...@oracle.com>>, OpenJDK Network Dev list <net-dev@openjdk.java.net<mailto:net-dev@openjdk.java.net>> Date: 11/04/2018 03:35 PM Subject: RE: 8169865 : Changes not ported to IPv4 ________________________________ Thanks Chris , As you suggested, I will provide the patch based on jdk 11. Thanks, Srividya S [Inactive hide details for "Langer, Christoph" ---11/04/2018 02:51:51 PM---Hi Srividya, I would also welcome this fix.]"Langer, Christoph" ---11/04/2018 02:51:51 PM---Hi Srividya, I would also welcome this fix. From: "Langer, Christoph" <christoph.lan...@sap.com<mailto:christoph.lan...@sap.com>> To: Srividya Shamaiah <ssham...@in.ibm.com<mailto:ssham...@in.ibm.com>>, Chris Hegarty <chris.hega...@oracle.com<mailto:chris.hega...@oracle.com>> Cc: OpenJDK Network Dev list <net-dev@openjdk.java.net<mailto:net-dev@openjdk.java.net>> Date: 11/04/2018 02:51 PM Subject: RE: 8169865 : Changes not ported to IPv4 ________________________________ Hi Srividya, I would also welcome this fix. Will you do the fix based on the jdk (11) depot? I think Java_java_net_Inet4AddressImpl_getLocalHostName should then be exactly the same as Java_java_net_Inet6AddressImpl_getLocalHostName. I can assist you with sponsoring/backporting to JDK8, if you like. Best regards Christoph From: net-dev [mailto:net-dev-boun...@openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of Srividya Shamaiah Sent: Mittwoch, 11. April 2018 09:19 To: Chris Hegarty <chris.hega...@oracle.com<mailto:chris.hega...@oracle.com>> Cc: OpenJDK Network Dev list <net-dev@openjdk.java.net<mailto:net-dev@openjdk.java.net>> Subject: Re: 8169865 : Changes not ported to IPv4 Thank you Chris for opening the JIRA bug, I will work on the fix and contribute it . Thanks, Srividya S [Inactive hide details for Chris Hegarty ---10/04/2018 08:51:05 PM---> On 10 Apr 2018, at 12:34, Srividya Shamaiah <sshamaia@in.]Chris Hegarty ---10/04/2018 08:51:05 PM---> On 10 Apr 2018, at 12:34, Srividya Shamaiah <ssham...@in.ibm.com<mailto:ssham...@in.ibm.com>> wrote: > From: Chris Hegarty <chris.hega...@oracle.com<mailto:chris.hega...@oracle.com>> To: Srividya Shamaiah <ssham...@in.ibm.com<mailto:ssham...@in.ibm.com>> Cc: OpenJDK Network Dev list <net-dev@openjdk.java.net<mailto:net-dev@openjdk.java.net>> Date: 10/04/2018 08:51 PM Subject: Re: 8169865 : Changes not ported to IPv4 ________________________________ > On 10 Apr 2018, at 12:34, Srividya Shamaiah > <ssham...@in.ibm.com<mailto:ssham...@in.ibm.com>> wrote: > > Hi Chris, > > One of our customer reported a similar issue and the issue can be resolved > through the bug fix 8169865 which was include at 8u152 level. We were looking > this issue from AIX perspective as it did not do the reverse lookup with bug > fix 8169865 (as reverse lookup is limited to solaris after the bug fix). > > While implementing the fix, we want to make sure the fix works for all > scenario. As there is an inconsistency between IPv6 and IPv4 after 8169865 > (as reverse lookup still exists for IPv4 on AIX and Linux), we are afraid > whether customer can hit the same issue if they use IPv4. > > Please confirm whether it makes sense to remove the reverse lookup of IPv4 > for AIX and linux platforms so that IPv4 and IPv6 processing is consistent > for those platforms. Yes, I believe it does. I filed the follow JIRA issue to track this: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__bugs.openjdk.java.net_browse_JDK-2D8201369&d=DwIFAg&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=cY5OjfQF2gZ_G00XrJYGrxPgLDHmXjFqs49sDD9oJN0&m=-LhngTQSiYD1d12WSDvX2Jldxusyok9A7LqJ4ZEIzos&s=8fDzPwCaD2hwIOSWkfchiRBeDz3uSyzk81kDXZFarXo&e= -Chris.
