Hi Alan, Volker,
Thanks a lot!
I've pushed the change.
Best regards
- Jonathan
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Volker Simonis <volker.simo...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> I just wanted to let you know that I've build your changes on AIX 5..3 and
> 7.1.
> I've also run the jdk regression tests without specific issues.
>
> So thumbs up from me!
>
> Regards,
> Volker
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 12:03 PM, Jonathan Lu <luc...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi Alan,
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Alan Bateman <alan.bate...@oracle.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On 05/06/2014 11:37, Jonathan Lu wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> If getsockopt(SO_ERROR) failed, I did not find any explicit docs about
> >> the behavior.
> >> but as I tested with some C code snippet, the value of sockopt_arg would
> >> not be changed if getsockopt(SO_ERROR) failed.
> >> So I prefer to keep the current approach, does it make sense to you ?
> >>
> >> The case that I was wondering about is the common case where
> >> getsockopt(SO_ERROR) succeeds and I was wondering if the code should
> >> actually be:
> >>
> >> if (sockopt_arg != 0 ) {
> >> errno = sockopt_arg;
> >> return -1;
> >> }
> >>
> >> That way the caller of NET_Connect will have errno set so that
> >> XXX_ThrowByNameWithLastError can create an appropriate exception
> message.
> >>
> >
> >
> > You are right! errno will be checked by other code if NET_Connect()
> failed,
> > I've updated the patch, please help to review.
> >
> > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~luchsh/JDK-8043954.3/
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> -Alan.
> >>
> >
> >
> > Many thanks
> > - Jonathan
>
