8302017: Allocate BadPaddingException only if it will be thrown

[alexeybakhtin]

Almost clean backport from JDK17 PR
The only difference is the copyright years and switch statement in the RSAPadding::unpad()

---

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
• JDK-8302017 needs maintainer approval

Issue

• JDK-8302017: Allocate BadPaddingException only if it will be thrown (Enhancement - P3 - Approved)

Reviewers

• Martin Balao (@martinuy - Reviewer) ⚠️ Review applies to 0a33cb2b

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk11u-dev.git pull/2383/head:pull/2383
$ git checkout pull/2383

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/2383
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk11u-dev.git pull/2383/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 2383

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 2383

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk11u-dev/pull/2383.diff

Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back abakhtin! 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]

This backport pull request has now been updated with issue from the original commit.

[mlbridge]

Webrevs

• 01: Full - Incremental (e935f07e)
• 00: Full (0a33cb2b)

[martinuy]

Hi @alexeybakhtin ,

Thanks for proposing this backport. One minor comment (that I made for 17u): the copyright date change in RSAPadding.java is not needed. Otherwise, looks good to me. Before moving forward, I'd wait for the 17u backport integration and check if there is any other change.

[openjdk]

⚠️ @alexeybakhtin This change is now ready for you to apply for maintainer approval. This can be done directly in each associated issue or by using the /approval command.

[alexeybakhtin]

Hi @alexeybakhtin ,

Thanks for proposing this backport. One minor comment (that I made for 17u): the copyright date change in RSAPadding.java is not needed. Otherwise, looks good to me. Before moving forward, I'd wait for the 17u backport integration and check if there is any other change.

Thank you @martinuy! copyright date is reverted.

[openjdk]

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

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

8302017: Allocate BadPaddingException only if it will be thrown

Reviewed-by: mbalao

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 4 new commits pushed to the master branch:

• aa03b6f: 8211438: [Testbug] runtime/XCheckJniJsig/XCheckJSig.java looks for libjsig in wrong location
• 3a961da: 8209946: [TESTBUG] CDS tests should use "@run driver"
• dec947a: 8209549: remove VMPropsExt from TEST.ROOT
• 1adabcd: 8307683: Loop Predication should not hoist range checks with trap on success projection by negating their condition

Please see this link for an up-to-date comparison between the source branch of this pull request and the master branch.
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.

[alexeybakhtin]

/integrate

[openjdk]

Going to push as commit 1a3385e.
Since your change was applied there have been 4 commits pushed to the master branch:

• aa03b6f: 8211438: [Testbug] runtime/XCheckJniJsig/XCheckJSig.java looks for libjsig in wrong location
• 3a961da: 8209946: [TESTBUG] CDS tests should use "@run driver"
• dec947a: 8209549: remove VMPropsExt from TEST.ROOT
• 1adabcd: 8307683: Loop Predication should not hoist range checks with trap on success projection by negating their condition

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

[openjdk]

@alexeybakhtin Pushed as commit 1a3385e.

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