On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 14:57:26 GMT, Sean Mullan <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hai-May Chao has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Update java.security
>> - Update Javadoc for getInstance()
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/security/KeyStore.java line 870:
>
>> 868: * each legacy keystore type. If the keystore type is also disabled,
>> 869: * the warning will not be shown.
>> 870: * If the {@systemProperty jdk.crypto.legacyAlgorithms} is set,
>
> When the javadoc is rendered, it doesn't say this is a system property, it
> just says:
>
> `If the jdk.crypto.legacyAlgorithms is set,`
>
> So, you should add the words "system property" after `{@systemProperty
> jdk.crypto.legacyAlgorithms}`.
>
> The same comment applies to the existing text above this for the
> `jdk.crypto.disabledAlgorithms` system property - can you also correct that
> as part of this change?
>
> This comment applies to all `getInstance` methods in this PR.
Add "system property" to `getInstance()` for legacyAlgorithms and the existing
disabledAlgorithms.
> src/java.base/share/conf/security/java.security line 821:
>
>> 819: # getInstance(...) methods of the supported Service classes, i.e.
>> Cipher,
>> 820: # KeyStore, MessageDigest, and Signature. If the algorithm is
>> considered legacy, the
>> 821: # JDK emits a warning when the algorithm is requested.
>
> Let's add 2 more sentences, same as the text in the `getInstance` methods:
> "This warning is shown once per caller for each legacy algorithm. If the
> algorithm is also disabled, the warning will not be shown."
Done.
> src/java.base/share/conf/security/java.security line 821:
>
>> 819: # getInstance(...) methods of the supported Service classes, i.e.
>> Cipher,
>> 820: # KeyStore, MessageDigest, and Signature. If the algorithm is
>> considered legacy, the
>> 821: # JDK emits a warning when the algorithm is requested.
>
> s/a warning/a warning at runtime/
Done.
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/31472#discussion_r3476630721
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/31472#discussion_r3476632690
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/31472#discussion_r3476633313
