Long chains created by direct Buffer::slice (original) (raw)

Paul Sandoz paul.sandoz at oracle.com
Fri Aug 3 22:15:30 UTC 2018

Got caught up with JVMLS this week…

I searched but could not find a test, so i added one, see:

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psandoz/jdk/JDK-8208362-direct-buffer-att/webrev/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psandoz/jdk/JDK-8208362-direct-buffer-att/webrev/>

Paul.

On Jul 27, 2018, at 12:35 PM, Paul Sandoz <Paul.Sandoz at oracle.com> wrote:

On Jul 27, 2018, at 1:09 AM, Florian Weimer <fw at deneb.enyo.de> wrote: * Paul Sandoz: I created this issue:

https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8208362 Thanks. The suggested fix requires a tweak though since an instance of a DirectBuffer interface is passed. This is required because views over direct ByteBuffers can be created. Noticed that as well. diff -r 448cd909c9e2 src/java.base/share/classes/java/nio/Direct-X-Buffer.java.template --- a/src/java.base/share/classes/java/nio/Direct-X-Buffer.java.template Thu Jul 26 11:53:59 2018 -0700 +++ b/src/java.base/share/classes/java/nio/Direct-X-Buffer.java.template Thu Jul 26 16:46:20 2018 -0700 @@ -194,7 +194,8 @@ #if[byte] cleaner = null; #end[byte] - att = db; + Object attachment = db.attachment(); + att = (attachment == null ? db : attachment); This is essentially what I put through jtreg (jdkcore), without any obvious issues, Thanks for testing. but I had not time yet to file a bug and create a webrev. Ah, my apologies, i did not realize you had author status. The parenthesis seem unnecessary. If this is an official JDK coding style, it is not widely used. It is unusual but I chose to keep consistent with the style in the source. Paul.

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list