Hi Chris, thanks, I pushed it: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/a8db670c7d12
After giving it a certain while in JDK9 I will also want to downport it to JDK8, but let's wait a bit first... Best regards Christoph > -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Hegarty [mailto:chris.hega...@oracle.com] > Sent: Donnerstag, 21. Juli 2016 17:15 > To: Langer, Christoph <christoph.lan...@sap.com>; net-dev@openjdk.java.net > Subject: Re: PING: RFR (S) JDK-8160174: java.net.NetworkInterface - fixes and > improvements for network interface listing > > Hi Christoph, > > On 19/07/16 14:48, Langer, Christoph wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > can I please get a review for my change: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~clanger/webrevs/8160174.3/ ? > > This really hard to review, since so many parts of the code > are moving around, but we did put this off a few times > already so probably makes sense to do it now. The code > should be more readable afterwards are as such easier to > maintain. > > I ran it through our internal build and test system and there > were no surprises. Consider it reviewed. > > -Chris. > > > I made some minor updates in place, mostly formatting, to the version from > one week ago. The only real change I made is that I now set the scope id of > IPv6 > addresses to the interface index also on BSD, where it was not done before. > Here I have the question if this is really the desired behavior to always set > the > interface as scope of any IPv6 address? > > > > Thanks in advance > > Christoph > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Langer, Christoph > >> Sent: Mittwoch, 13. Juli 2016 17:02 > >> To: 'Chris Hegarty' <chris.hega...@oracle.com> > >> Cc: net-dev@openjdk.java.net > >> Subject: RE: RFR (S) JDK-8160174: java.net.NetworkInterface - fixes and > >> improvements for network interface listing > >> > >> Hi Chris, > >> > >> ok, here is my new version which I think is quite a nice cleanup - though > >> probably not "S" any more: > >> > >> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~clanger/webrevs/8160174.3/ > >> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8160174 > >> > >> I updated the bug report to list all the small things that I've fixed. I > >> now took > the > >> approach to depuzzle all "enum*Interfaces" functions for the platforms and > >> now the coding should really be easier to read - though, of course, some > parts > >> got duplicated. > >> > >> The notable differences in the output of NetworkInterface.getAll() are that > a) > >> no broadcast address is returned any more for loopback addresses on Linux > and > >> b) subnet prefixes for AIX IPv6 interfaces should work now. The rest should > be > >> optimizations under the cover. > >> > >> Please review. > >> > >> Thanks > >> Christoph > >> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: Chris Hegarty [mailto:chris.hega...@oracle.com] > >>> Sent: Dienstag, 12. Juli 2016 16:10 > >>> To: Langer, Christoph <christoph.lan...@sap.com> > >>> Cc: net-dev@openjdk.java.net > >>> Subject: Re: RFR (S) JDK-8160174: java.net.NetworkInterface - fixes and > >>> improvements for network interface listing > >>> > >>> Christoph, > >>> > >>>> On 11 Jul 2016, at 14:36, Langer, Christoph <christoph.lan...@sap.com> > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Hi Chris (or anyone who is holding a stake in the NetworkInterface native > >>> implementation), > >>>> > >>>> I’ve spent some time on cleaning up NetworkInterface.c and came up with > a > >>> bigger change:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~clanger/webrevs/8160174.2/ > >>>> > >>>> With this I attempted to consolidate the interface listing functionality > >>>> of > the > >> 2 > >>> main categories – one is ioctl (used on Linux IPv4, Solaris and AIX) and > >>> the > >>> other is getifaddrs (used on MacOS). I introduced some defines to switch > >>> between the implementations. I also consolidated the functionality for the > >> ioctl > >>> based network interface listings by using an #ifdef section to distinguish > >>> between the Linux/AIX versus Solaris field and constant names. > >>>> > >>>> I’ve spent some time testing on the platforms and in principal it works. > But > >> as > >>> it is a matter of taste, I’d like to ask you if you support this type of > >>> change > or > >>> have any hints or recommendations before going forward to finalize this. > >>> > >>> I’m personally don’t like this approach much. I think it adds further > >>> complexity and difficulty to this code, which already has its fair share > >>> of both. > >>> > >>>> For Linux I’m also suggesting to use the getifaddrs approach – I tested > >>>> and > >>> found it working everywhere and with this we could get rid of the > >>> implementation to read /proc/net for IPv6. > >>> > >>> You should probably break this type of change out, so that it can be > >>> evaluated independently, on its own merit. If it add nothing more than > >>> clean up, may it makes sense for this to happen early in 10, where it > >>> can have a longer time to bake. > >>> > >>>> Furthermore I’m generally setting Null for the IPv6 broadcast address – > >> which > >>> I think is common sense for IPv6. > >>> > >>> Same as above. This “smaller” changes can sometimes get lost in > >>> the noise of larger refactoring. > >>> > >>> -Chris. > >>> > >>> > >>>> Thanks in advance and best regards > >>>> Christoph > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> From: Langer, Christoph > >>>> Sent: Donnerstag, 23. Juni 2016 16:37 > >>>> To: 'net-dev@openjdk.java.net' <net-dev@openjdk.java.net> > >>>> Subject: RFR (S) JDK-8160174: java.net.NetworkInterface - fixes and > >>> improvements for network interface listing > >>>> > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> can I please get a review the following change: > >>>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~clanger/webrevs/8160174.1/ > >>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8160174 > >>>> > >>>> I made further fixes and cleanups for listing Unix type network > >>>> interfaces, > >>> especially on AIX and Linux. I ran builds and verified also on Solaris and > Mac. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks > >>>> Christoph > >
