On Fri, 21 Mar 2025 11:41:45 GMT, Volkan Yazici <vyaz...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Fixes endian handling `jdk.internal.net.http.websocket.Frame.Masker`.
>>
>> ### Implementation notes
>>
>> I deleted the `Frame` clone in tests, and rewired the test code depending on
>> it to the actual `Frame`. To enable this, I relaxed the visibility of the
>> actual `Frame`. I guess the `Frame` clone was introduced to have strict
>> visibility in the actual `Frame`. Though this is not needed since the actual
>> `Frame` is in an internal package. Plus, the fact that bug is in the `Frame`
>> class hints in the direction that there should be one `Frame`.
>
> Volkan Yazici has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> Improve `applyVectorMask` JavaDoc
>
> Co-authored-by: Michael McMahon
> <70538289+michael-mc-ma...@users.noreply.github.com>
src/java.net.http/share/classes/jdk/internal/net/http/websocket/Frame.java line
147:
> 145: * Positions the {@link #offset} at 0, which is needed for
> vectorized masking, by masking necessary amount of bytes.
> 146: */
> 147: private void initVectorMask(ByteBuffer src, ByteBuffer dst) {
This method and `applyPlainMask` uses big-endian `maskBytes` which can be wrong
if `dst` is not big endian. Should we just assert `dst` is big endian
everywhere, as it seems to be the case?
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/24033#discussion_r2009033133
