Re: RFR 8058824: Drop TwoStacks socket implementation in jdk9 [win] - Part I

2014-09-23 Thread Michael McMahon
Hi Ivan, Did you look at the possibility of removing the TwoStacks class altogether? For Solaris/Linux etc. ipv4 only and ipv6/v4 are all handled in the same impl class with just a switch at socket creation time, selecting AF_INET or AF_INET6. If there is a good reason to keep the implementati

Re: RFR 8058824: Drop TwoStacks socket implementation in jdk9 [win] - Part I

2014-09-23 Thread Ivan Gerasimov
Thanks Michael! On 23.09.2014 13:41, Michael McMahon wrote: Hi Ivan, Did you look at the possibility of removing the TwoStacks class altogether? For Solaris/Linux etc. ipv4 only and ipv6/v4 are all handled in the same impl class with just a switch at socket creation time, selecting AF_INET or

Re: RFR 8058824: Drop TwoStacks socket implementation in jdk9 [win] - Part I

2014-09-23 Thread Michael McMahon
Ivan, Okay. I see the "part 1" in the subject line now, but maybe the bug should be updated to define the scope of the change and we should file a separate bug report then. I'm okay with leaving the class with the current name. What about the datagram socket code? It might make sense to includ

RFR 8058965: Remove IPv6 support from TwoStacksPlainSocketImpl

2014-09-23 Thread Ivan Gerasimov
Thank you Michael! Okay. I see the "part 1" in the subject line now, but maybe the bug should be updated to define the scope of the change and we should file a separate bug report then. I created the subtask to track this part (the subject of the thread is changed accordingly): https://bugs

RE: Taking advantage of TCP Loopback fast path in Windows

2014-09-23 Thread Martin Sawicki (MS OPEN TECH)
Hello We're proposing an improvement to the OpenJDK which enables users to take advantage of the TCP loopback fast path mechanism in Windows for significantly higher performance of sockets whose both end points are on the same machine. This is especially relevant in distributed server-side/clou

Re: Taking advantage of TCP Loopback fast path in Windows

2014-09-23 Thread Bernd Eckenfels
Hello, Is the GetVersionEx the recommended way to check for this feature? (we had some trouble with manifests in the past and I think there is a new version helper api to query for minimum levels?) Or would it easier to just try it and remeber the WSAEOPNOTSUPP? I see on MSDN the only reason why

Re: Taking advantage of TCP Loopback fast path in Windows

2014-09-23 Thread Kirk Shoop (MS OPEN TECH)
Thanks for taking a look! The IOCTL only affects the selection of a shorter code path when the socket is connected and only if both end-points are on the same machine and both end-points have set the IOCTL. so setting it only on one side or on another machine has no affect. "Applying SIO_LOOPB