[aarch64-port-dev ] Webrev of Oracle ARM & AARCH64 Sources

Christian Thalinger cthalinger at twitter.com
Fri Sep 30 22:42:18 UTC 2016

> On Sep 29, 2016, at 12:54 AM, Andrey Petushkov <andrey.petushkov at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 29 Sep 2016, at 13:43, Andrew Haley <aph at redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 29/09/16 11:13, Andrey Petushkov wrote:
>>> Pardon, I’m too puzzled by your statement. To my best knowledge no
>>> one from Azul considers this port as immature and wishes to drop
>>> it. Nor AFAIK anyone from Azul has expressed that on the
>>> maillist.
>> My mistake, then.  I should have waited for you to speak.  I
>> apologize.
>>> In addition, aarch32 port shares much in common with RH’s aarch64
>>> implementation so well, if you keep aarch64 in main openjdk repos
>>> it’s much easier to merge aarch32 into it, rather than merge with
>>> Sun/Oracle’s arm implementation.
>> There is no good technical reason for AArch64 to merge with AArch32,
>> and IMO it would create a mess.  AArch64 is a clean-sheet design which
>> shares some of its DNA with AArch32, but that is all.  It's not like
>> x86-64, which is a 64-bit extension of x86.
> Well, it’s AArch32 which is not clean-sheet design but rather borrows from AArch64 :)
> I admit that there are much more difference between architectures than for x86 so you might be right that the difference in the code could be too big. I just have a feeling it’s not. I can mistake of course, I did not diff specifically
>>> And yes, aarch32 is missing c2 port, but this should not make any
>>> difference long-term, right?
>> I guess not, if a C2 port is forthcoming.
> My idea here that Oracle’s Graal can make c2 obsolete and it might not worth to port c2 only for Java 9

Listen to this man :-)

More information about the aarch32-port-dev mailing list