Christoph, > On 17 Oct 2016, at 09:40, Langer, Christoph <christoph.lan...@sap.com> wrote: > … > Hi, > > as I already mentioned, here is another proposal for cleanup in libnet: > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167481 > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~clanger/webrevs/8167481.0/
Overall, this looks good. Specific comments below ... > This time I touched the includes. Generally I reordered the includes to > include “net_util.h” first, then any JNI includes, such as > “java_net_InetAddress.h” and finally all standard header includes in > alphabetical order. For platform specific includes, I use the order Linux, > AIX, Solaris, BSD. I removed all includes that don’t seem to be necessary to > get the respective file compiled. Is that the correct approach that is > desired? It is good to be consistent. My personal preference is to order the includes; 1) system, 2) platform specific includes, 3) JNI includes, and finally, 4) generated headers ( e.g. “java_net_InetAddress.h” ). > To make this work, I had to remove the definitions “IPv4” and “IPv6” in > net_util.h and replace their usages with “java_net_InetAddress_IPv4” resp. > “java_net_InetAddress_IPv6” from JNI which seems to be the correct thing to > do anyway. Right. This is a good change. Trivially, and it is not strictly necessary but good for readability, would be to add @Native to InetAddress.IPv4 and InetAddress.IPv6. > For Windows I also cleaned up (removed) the definition of SOCKADDR_IN6 in > net_util_md.h and replaced all occurences with sockaddr_in6. It seems that > the capital letters version SOCKADDR_IN6 is a remainder of a very old > Microsoft runtime (_MSC_VER < 1310) which corresponds to MSVC 7.0, which is > even older than Visual Studio 2003. So I’m wondering if I should remove the > whole section in windows net_util_md.h now (lines 47 – 177)? I think it should be ok to remove this. > For Windows it seems that we can also completely get rid of > src/java.base/windows/native/libnet/icmp.h as the icmp stuff is all brought > by the #include <icmpapi.h>. Would you agree to that? Ok. > So far I successfully ran builds in my local environments for Windows, Linux, > AIX, Solaris and Apple. I’ve now added the changeset to our local regression > testing environment for OpenJDK. If the change is to your like, I would like > to ask you to also run it through JPRT to see if I missed some dependency. I ran your patch through our internal build and test system and there are no surprises. -Chris. > Thanks and best regards > Christoph
