On Thu, 8 Aug 2024 19:30:31 GMT, Valerie Peng <valer...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Kevin Driver has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a >> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes >> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains 16 additional >> commits since the last revision: >> >> - update test to include Spi updates >> - Update with latest from master >> >> Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into kdf-jep-wip >> # Please enter a commit message to explain why this merge is necessary, >> # especially if it merges an updated upstream into a topic branch. >> # >> # Lines starting with '#' will be ignored, and an empty message aborts >> # the commit. >> - add engineGetKDFParameters to the KDFSpi >> - code review comment fix for javadoc specification >> - change course on null return values from derive methods >> - code review comments >> - threading refactor + code review comments >> - review comments >> - review comments >> - update code snippet type in KDF >> - ... and 6 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/2638d442...dd2ee48f > > src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/KDF.java line 286: > >> 284: public static KDF getInstance(String algorithm, Provider provider) >> 285: throws NoSuchAlgorithmException { >> 286: Objects.requireNonNull(provider, "provider may not be null"); > > See the above comment for null-check inconsistency. Addressed in https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/20301/commits/c6f491cd05c76088e6431b2ba9d4ab42b29e4055. Please indicate if this is resolved. > src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/KDF.java line 469: > >> 467: * @throws InvalidAlgorithmParameterException >> 468: * if the information contained within the {@code >> kdfParameterSpec} is >> 469: * invalid, if {@code alg} is invalid, or if their combination > > Again, what is the definition of `alg` being invalid? Would it be clearer to > just refer to `KDFSpi.engineDeriveKey()` and not duplicating the words here? Addressed in https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/20301/commits/c6f491cd05c76088e6431b2ba9d4ab42b29e4055. Please indicate if this is resolved. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20301#discussion_r1720350883 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20301#discussion_r1720355809
