Fixed a bug where the newly added padding has wrong writeIndex
This commit is contained in:
parent
ed27ca19ea
commit
d3488a1852
@ -148,10 +148,6 @@ public class CompositeChannelBuffer extends AbstractChannelBuffer {
|
||||
|
||||
assert c.readerIndex() == 0;
|
||||
assert c.writerIndex() == c.capacity();
|
||||
if (c.writerIndex() != c.capacity()) {
|
||||
System.err.println(c);
|
||||
throw new Error();
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
components[i] = c;
|
||||
}
|
||||
@ -675,7 +671,9 @@ public class CompositeChannelBuffer extends AbstractChannelBuffer {
|
||||
// Add a new buffer so that the capacity of this composite buffer does
|
||||
// not decrease due to the discarded components.
|
||||
// XXX Might create too many components if discarded by small amount.
|
||||
list.add(ChannelBuffers.buffer(order(), localReaderIndex));
|
||||
final ChannelBuffer padding = ChannelBuffers.buffer(order(), localReaderIndex);
|
||||
padding.writerIndex(localReaderIndex);
|
||||
list.add(padding);
|
||||
|
||||
// Reset the index markers to get the index marker values.
|
||||
int localMarkedReaderIndex = localReaderIndex;
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user