8155902: DataOuputStream should clarify that it might write primitive types as multiple byte groups

[bplb]

Add a disclaimer to java.io.DataOutputStream to the effect that it makes no guarantee as to how the underlying output stream actually writes the bytes provided to it.

---

Progress

• Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
• Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
• Commit message must refer to an issue
• Change requires CSR request JDK-8311882 to be approved

Issues

• JDK-8155902: DataOuputStream should clarify that it might write primitive types as multiple byte groups (Bug - P4)
• JDK-8311882: DataOuputStream should clarify that it might write primitive types as multiple byte groups (CSR)

Reviewers

• Alan Bateman (@AlanBateman - Reviewer)
• Daniel Jeliński (@djelinski - Reviewer)
• Lance Andersen (@LanceAndersen - Reviewer)
• Roger Riggs (@RogerRiggs - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/14791/head:pull/14791
$ git checkout pull/14791

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/14791
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/14791/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 14791

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 14791

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/14791.diff

Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

[bplb]

It might be equally reasonable simply to resolve the issue as "Not an Issue." A CSR will be created if that is not the case.

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back bpb! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

[openjdk]

@bplb The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

• core-libs

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing list. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

[mlbridge]

Webrevs

• 03: Full - Incremental (3f195664)
• 02: Full - Incremental (f89aa63a)
• 01: Full - Incremental (43c392e8)
• 00: Full (b7778adc)

[djelinski]

This issue is reported against JDK 8 and 9. It was fixed in 16 with 17f04fc. I think you can close it as duplicate.

[bplb]

This issue is reported against JDK 8 and 9. It was fixed in 16 with 17f04fc. I think you can close it as duplicate.

Thanks. I saw that change go by but did not connect the dots. Was it actually verified that things are not split up into two or more packets? It seems that write(2) could in fact return a value less than the number of bytes requested.

[djelinski]

Was it actually verified that things are not split up into two or more packets? It seems that write(2) could in fact return a value less than the number of bytes requested.

Yes, the test case included in JBS sends all 4 bytes in a single packet now.
We can't guarantee that every writeInt will always send all bytes in the same packet, but at least we won't send single-byte packets.

[bplb]

/csr

[openjdk]

@bplb has indicated that a compatibility and specification (CSR) request is needed for this pull request.

@bplb please create a CSR request for issue JDK-8155902 with the correct fix version. This pull request cannot be integrated until the CSR request is approved.

[AlanBateman]

In passing, we should probably look into the inconsistency in the synchronization. The write methods are synchronized, the writeXXX methods and other methods are not. The class specified that it is not safe for use by concurrent threads without appropriate synchronization.

[bplb]

In passing, we should probably look into the inconsistency in the synchronization.

This can be addressed in the context of JDK-8295797.

[djelinski]

LGTM.

[openjdk]

@bplb This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8155902: DataOuputStream should clarify that it might write primitive types as multiple byte groups

Reviewed-by: alanb, djelinski, lancea, rriggs

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 51 new commits pushed to the master branch:

• f82c818: 8308694: Clarify reversed() default methods' implementation requirements
• 7304316: 8311926: java/lang/ScopedValue/StressStackOverflow.java takes 9mins in tier1
• aa7367f: 8311921: Inform about MaxExpectedDataSegmentSize in case of pthread_create failures on AIX
• 753bd56: 8311870: Split CompressedKlassPointers from compressedOops.hpp
• 0b0e064: 8311656: Shenandoah: Unused ShenandoahSATBAndRemarkThreadsClosure::_claim_token
• fd7fddb: 8295894: Remove SECOM certificate that is expiring in September 2023
• d82ade3: 8310683: Refactor StandardCharset/standard.java to use JUnit
• aac903d: 8311805: Clean up ScrollPane: drop redundant initialiser, mark scroller final
• 15195e6: 8310066: Improve test coverage for JVMTI GetThreadState on carrier and mounted vthread
• 6cb9ec3: 6960866: [Fmt-Ch] ChoiceFormat claims impossible and unimplemented functionality
• ... and 41 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/6ebb0e3bd4ba3579c66cdc5a329e95df7bda5b95...master

As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

[bplb]

/integrate

[openjdk]

Going to push as commit ed9337e.
Since your change was applied there have been 51 commits pushed to the master branch:

• f82c818: 8308694: Clarify reversed() default methods' implementation requirements
• 7304316: 8311926: java/lang/ScopedValue/StressStackOverflow.java takes 9mins in tier1
• aa7367f: 8311921: Inform about MaxExpectedDataSegmentSize in case of pthread_create failures on AIX
• 753bd56: 8311870: Split CompressedKlassPointers from compressedOops.hpp
• 0b0e064: 8311656: Shenandoah: Unused ShenandoahSATBAndRemarkThreadsClosure::_claim_token
• fd7fddb: 8295894: Remove SECOM certificate that is expiring in September 2023
• d82ade3: 8310683: Refactor StandardCharset/standard.java to use JUnit
• aac903d: 8311805: Clean up ScrollPane: drop redundant initialiser, mark scroller final
• 15195e6: 8310066: Improve test coverage for JVMTI GetThreadState on carrier and mounted vthread
• 6cb9ec3: 6960866: [Fmt-Ch] ChoiceFormat claims impossible and unimplemented functionality
• ... and 41 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/6ebb0e3bd4ba3579c66cdc5a329e95df7bda5b95...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

[openjdk]

@bplb Pushed as commit ed9337e.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.