On Wed, 28 Apr 2021 08:20:05 GMT, Chris Hegarty <che...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/sun/nio/ch/IOUtil.java line 466: >> >>> 464: } >>> 465: >>> 466: private static final JavaNioAccess NIO_ACCESS = >>> SharedSecrets.getJavaNioAccess(); >> >> It might be cleaner to move to acquire/release methods to their own >> supporting class as it's not really IOUtil. > > I went back and forth on this a number of times already. I think where we > landed is a reasonable place, given the current shape of the code. > > Scope is a private property of Buffer, and as such should be consulted > anywhere where a buffer's address is being accessed. In fact, a prior > prototype would not allow access to the underlying address value without the > caller passing a valid handle for the buffer view's scope. It's hard to find > the sweet-spot here between code reuse and safety, but the high-order bit is > that the code accessing the address is auditable and testable to avoid > accessing memory unsafely. Maybe there is a better alternative implementation > code structure (at the cost of some duplication), but it is not obvious to me > what that is (and I have given it some thought). Suggestions welcome. > > Note, there is a little more follow-on work to be done in this area, if we > are to expand support to other non-TCP channel implementations. Maybe > investigation into possible code refactorings could be done as part of that? Can you create a follow-on issue to re-visit the changes to IOUtil? The changes in this area that are in this PR will need to re-worked so that it more cleanly separate the synchronous and asynchronous usages. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3699
