8264666: Change implementation of safeAdd/safeMult in the LCMSImageLayout class #3333

mrserb · 2021-04-02T23:02:50Z

Description of the new version of the fix:
While I have worked on this change and tried to consider the comments, I have found that the usages of the "safeAdd/safeMult" in the LCMSImageLayout class are incorrect. Both methods are based on the "Math" versions but throw a different exception. The problem is that its implementation may accept the negative values during intermediate calculation, see the old implementation of "verify" method:

We check the "offset" value: 0 <= offset < dataArrayLength
We do some intermediate calculations that "accept" negative values
We check the final "off" value: 0 <= offset < dataArrayLength

I wondered is it possible to provide some data that using wrong/negative data at step2 may result in the correct check at step3. I spent some time and was able to reproduce the problem with the attached test case. Note that the test is a little bit cryptic since it is not possible to reproduce it by input image data.

Note: I have removed all cleanup from the fix, to make it simpler.

<======>
Description of the old version of the fix:

The hand-crafted methods for addition and multiplication are replaced by the "Math" versions.
Cleanup: the usage of do/while(false) is removed

Progress

Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
Commit message must refer to an issue
Change must be properly reviewed

Issue

JDK-8264666: Change implementation of safeAdd/safeMult in the LCMSImageLayout class

Reviewers

Phil Race (@prrace - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/3333/head:pull/3333
$ git checkout pull/3333

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/3333
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/3333/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 3333

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 3333

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3333.diff

bridgekeeper · 2021-04-02T23:03:46Z

👋 Welcome back serb! 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 · 2021-04-02T23:05:23Z

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

2d

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.

mrserb · 2021-04-02T23:06:43Z

The nice PR number: 3333!

mrserb · 2021-04-04T07:58:44Z

src/java.desktop/share/classes/sun/java2d/cmm/lcms/LCMSImageLayout.java

-                    if (l.nextRowOffset == l.width * 4 * intRaster.getPixelStride()) {
-                        l.imageAtOnce = true;
-                    }
-                } while (false);


Any idea why the "do/while(false)" was used here?

I can only guess it was just style ..

Probably it is just a way to highlight and improve readability of a block of code, but simply {} would be enough in this case.

mlbridge · 2021-04-07T19:55:58Z

Webrevs

01: Full - Incremental (b183980c)
00: Full (a9e91601)

prrace · 2021-04-07T20:14:06Z

I don't understand the exception handling here. multiplyExact and addExact will throw a runtime exception - ArithmeticException. And I don't see where it is caught. The change for ImageLayoutException to extend ArithmeticException doesn't seem like it can help here. Where is the ArithmeticException being turned into ImageLayoutException ?

mrserb · 2021-04-07T23:23:28Z

I don't understand the exception handling here. multiplyExact and addExact will throw a runtime exception - ArithmeticException. And I don't see where it is caught. The change for ImageLayoutException to extend ArithmeticException doesn't seem like it can help here. Where is the ArithmeticException being turned into ImageLayoutException ?

O_o for some reason... missed that.

bridgekeeper · 2021-05-06T00:01:20Z

@mrserb This pull request has been inactive for more than 8 weeks and will be automatically closed if another 8 weeks passes without any activity. To avoid this, simply add a new comment to the pull request. Feel free to ask for assistance if you need help with progressing this pull request towards integration!

bridgekeeper · 2021-06-03T02:44:27Z

@mrserb This pull request has been inactive for more than 8 weeks and will be automatically closed if another 8 weeks passes without any activity. To avoid this, simply add a new comment to the pull request. Feel free to ask for assistance if you need help with progressing this pull request towards integration!

bridgekeeper · 2021-07-05T19:39:23Z

@mrserb This pull request has been inactive for more than 8 weeks and will be automatically closed if another 8 weeks passes without any activity. To avoid this, simply add a new comment to the pull request. Feel free to ask for assistance if you need help with progressing this pull request towards integration!

bridgekeeper · 2021-08-03T04:28:36Z

@mrserb This pull request has been inactive for more than 8 weeks and will be automatically closed if another 8 weeks passes without any activity. To avoid this, simply add a new comment to the pull request. Feel free to ask for assistance if you need help with progressing this pull request towards integration!

bridgekeeper · 2021-08-31T05:36:10Z

@mrserb This pull request has been inactive for more than 8 weeks and will be automatically closed if another 8 weeks passes without any activity. To avoid this, simply add a new comment to the pull request. Feel free to ask for assistance if you need help with progressing this pull request towards integration!

bridgekeeper · 2021-09-28T08:22:52Z

@mrserb This pull request has been inactive for more than 8 weeks and will be automatically closed if another 8 weeks passes without any activity. To avoid this, simply add a new comment to the pull request. Feel free to ask for assistance if you need help with progressing this pull request towards integration!

bridgekeeper · 2021-10-27T05:48:26Z

@mrserb This pull request has been inactive for more than 8 weeks and will be automatically closed if another 8 weeks passes without any activity. To avoid this, simply add a new comment to the pull request. Feel free to ask for assistance if you need help with progressing this pull request towards integration!

bridgekeeper · 2021-11-26T07:53:43Z

@mrserb This pull request has been inactive for more than 8 weeks and will be automatically closed if another 8 weeks passes without any activity. To avoid this, simply add a new comment to the pull request. Feel free to ask for assistance if you need help with progressing this pull request towards integration!

bridgekeeper · 2021-12-29T08:58:06Z

@mrserb This pull request has been inactive for more than 8 weeks and will be automatically closed if another 8 weeks passes without any activity. To avoid this, simply add a new comment to the pull request. Feel free to ask for assistance if you need help with progressing this pull request towards integration!

bridgekeeper · 2022-01-27T04:41:14Z

@mrserb This pull request has been inactive for more than 8 weeks and will be automatically closed if another 8 weeks passes without any activity. To avoid this, simply add a new comment to the pull request. Feel free to ask for assistance if you need help with progressing this pull request towards integration!

bridgekeeper · 2022-02-24T23:11:20Z

@mrserb This pull request has been inactive for more than 8 weeks and will be automatically closed if another 8 weeks passes without any activity. To avoid this, simply add a new comment to the pull request. Feel free to ask for assistance if you need help with progressing this pull request towards integration!

mrserb · 2022-04-06T21:16:47Z

I think the usage of these methods in this class is wrong. Both allow negative values which should not be accepted.

This reverts commit a9e9160.

This reverts commit a1876fa.

mrserb · 2022-04-22T23:48:40Z

The fix is reworked based on the new facts about that methods.

prrace · 2021-04-07T20:03:31Z

src/java.desktop/share/classes/sun/java2d/cmm/lcms/LCMSImageLayout.java

-                    if (l.nextRowOffset == l.width * 4 * intRaster.getPixelStride()) {
-                        l.imageAtOnce = true;
-                    }
-                } while (false);


I can only guess it was just style ..

openjdk · 2022-04-27T18:46:42Z

@mrserb 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:

8264666: Change implementation of safeAdd/safeMult in the LCMSImageLayout class

Reviewed-by: prr

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 64 new commits pushed to the master branch:

8a16842: 8176501: Method Shape.getBounds2D() incorrectly includes Bezier control points in bounding box
05dac5a: 8280468: Crashes in getConfigColormap, getConfigVisualId, XVisualIDFromVisual on Linux
6db2e16: 8284077: Create an automated test for JDK-4170173
a0b984a: 8282933: Create a test for JDK-4529616
716a80a: 8283179: SA tests fail with "ERROR: catch_mach_exception_raise: Message doesn't denote a Unix soft signal."
6c79671: 8285633: Take better advantage of generic MethodType cache
5b42747: 8285736: JDK-8236128 causes validate-source failures
6ce4e75: 8284726: Print active locale settings in hs_err reports and in VM.info
b675c59: 8236128: Allow jpackage create installers for services
ef27081: 8285671: java/nio/channels/etc/PrintSupportedOptions.java and java/nio/channels/DatagramChannel/AfterDisconnect.java are failing
... and 54 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/d84b9c54893dd33686d49755fca7a4b7f6a681c4...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.

mrserb · 2022-04-29T05:52:19Z

/integrate

openjdk · 2022-04-29T05:53:51Z

Going to push as commit 40f19c0.
Since your change was applied there have been 92 commits pushed to the master branch:

1e28fcb: 8155701: The compiler fails with an AssertionError: typeSig ERROR
99388ef: 8283624: Create an automated regression test for RFE-4390885
94b533a: 8285699: riscv: Provide information when hitting a HaltNode
e2e943a: 8285688: Add links to JEPs and JSRs to SourceVersion
80cf59f: 8285610: TreeInfo.pathFor and its uses appear to be dead code
21b62fe: 8195589: T6587786.java failed after JDK-8189997
8190217: 8285496: DocLint does not check for missing @param tags for type parameters on classes and interfaces
64d98ba: 8285094: Test java/awt/Frame/InvisibleOwner/InvisibleOwner.java failing on Linux
573eace: 8285504: Minor cleanup could be done in javax.net
bba456a: 8285676: Add missing @param tags for type parameters on classes and interfaces
... and 82 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/d84b9c54893dd33686d49755fca7a4b7f6a681c4...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

openjdk · 2022-04-29T05:54:08Z

@mrserb Pushed as commit 40f19c0.

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

mrserb added 2 commits April 1, 2021 18:37

safeXX -> xxExact

a1876fa

delete "do{...} while (false);"

a9e9160

openjdk bot added the 2d client-libs-dev@openjdk.org label Apr 2, 2021

mrserb commented Apr 4, 2021

View reviewed changes

mrserb marked this pull request as ready for review April 7, 2021 19:48

openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Apr 7, 2021

mrserb marked this pull request as draft April 8, 2021 01:17

openjdk bot removed the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Apr 8, 2021

openjdk bot added the client client-libs-dev@openjdk.org label Sep 10, 2021

mrserb added 3 commits April 21, 2022 23:47

Revert "delete "do{...} while (false);""

11ee435

This reverts commit a9e9160.

Revert "safeXX -> xxExact"

6f83e68

This reverts commit a1876fa.

Merge branch 'master' into LCMSImageLayout

69f5f5c

Initial version 8264666

b183980

mrserb changed the title ~~8264666: Reuse Math.multiplyExact/addExact in the LCMSImageLayout class~~ 8264666: Change implementation of safeAdd/safeMult in the LCMSImageLayout class Apr 22, 2022

mrserb marked this pull request as ready for review April 22, 2022 08:16

openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Apr 22, 2022

prrace approved these changes Apr 27, 2022

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Apr 27, 2022

openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Apr 29, 2022

openjdk bot closed this Apr 29, 2022

openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Apr 29, 2022

mrserb deleted the LCMSImageLayout branch May 16, 2022 05:52

8264666: Change implementation of safeAdd/safeMult in the LCMSImageLayout class #3333

8264666: Change implementation of safeAdd/safeMult in the LCMSImageLayout class #3333

mrserb commented Apr 2, 2021 •

edited by openjdk bot

bridgekeeper bot commented Apr 2, 2021

openjdk bot commented Apr 2, 2021

mrserb commented Apr 2, 2021

mrserb Apr 4, 2021

prrace Apr 7, 2021

azvegint Apr 7, 2021

mlbridge bot commented Apr 7, 2021 •

edited

prrace commented Apr 7, 2021

mrserb commented Apr 7, 2021

bridgekeeper bot commented May 6, 2021

bridgekeeper bot commented Jun 3, 2021

bridgekeeper bot commented Jul 5, 2021

bridgekeeper bot commented Aug 3, 2021

bridgekeeper bot commented Aug 31, 2021

bridgekeeper bot commented Sep 28, 2021

bridgekeeper bot commented Oct 27, 2021

bridgekeeper bot commented Nov 26, 2021

bridgekeeper bot commented Dec 29, 2021

bridgekeeper bot commented Jan 27, 2022

bridgekeeper bot commented Feb 24, 2022

mrserb commented Apr 6, 2022

mrserb commented Apr 22, 2022

prrace Apr 7, 2021

openjdk bot commented Apr 27, 2022

mrserb commented Apr 29, 2022

openjdk bot commented Apr 29, 2022

openjdk bot commented Apr 29, 2022

8264666: Change implementation of safeAdd/safeMult in the LCMSImageLayout class #3333

8264666: Change implementation of safeAdd/safeMult in the LCMSImageLayout class #3333

Conversation

mrserb commented Apr 2, 2021 • edited by openjdk bot

Progress

Issue

Reviewers

Reviewing

bridgekeeper bot commented Apr 2, 2021

openjdk bot commented Apr 2, 2021

mrserb commented Apr 2, 2021

mrserb Apr 4, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

prrace Apr 7, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

azvegint Apr 7, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mlbridge bot commented Apr 7, 2021 • edited

Webrevs

prrace commented Apr 7, 2021

mrserb commented Apr 7, 2021

bridgekeeper bot commented May 6, 2021

bridgekeeper bot commented Jun 3, 2021

bridgekeeper bot commented Jul 5, 2021

bridgekeeper bot commented Aug 3, 2021

bridgekeeper bot commented Aug 31, 2021

bridgekeeper bot commented Sep 28, 2021

bridgekeeper bot commented Oct 27, 2021

bridgekeeper bot commented Nov 26, 2021

bridgekeeper bot commented Dec 29, 2021

bridgekeeper bot commented Jan 27, 2022

bridgekeeper bot commented Feb 24, 2022

mrserb commented Apr 6, 2022

mrserb commented Apr 22, 2022

prrace Apr 7, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

openjdk bot commented Apr 27, 2022

mrserb commented Apr 29, 2022

openjdk bot commented Apr 29, 2022

openjdk bot commented Apr 29, 2022

mrserb commented Apr 2, 2021 •

edited by openjdk bot

mlbridge bot commented Apr 7, 2021 •

edited