Update: JEP drafted (was: RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: [aarch64-port-dev ] OpenJDK extension to AArch64 and Windows)

Monica Beckwith Monica.Beckwith at microsoft.com
Thu Jul 2 21:38:07 UTC 2020

Hello all,

Here’s our JEP: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8248496.Thank you all so much for helping us out with the process. 

We also have refined our changesets, and we are in the process of attaching them to the umbrella bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8248238.

@Dalibor Topic: I wanted to provide more details on the UI support - we have recently tested “JFC applications and applets”[0] in the JDK `demo/jfc` directory on three different Arm64 systems[1]. I found a bug related to Vectored Exception Handling (VEH) and Structured Exception Handling (SEH). @Ludovic is involved in the VEH/SEH discussions on the mailing list. And internally, we will make sure that the changeset for `VEH for aarch64` will incorporate the changes. 

@David Holmes: I will start a new RFR with the umbrella bug ID (8248238) in the subject once we have all the changesets ready to go.



[0]: https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/technotes/samples/demos.html 
[1]: https://github.com/microsoft/openjdk-aarch64/blob/master/Arm64_systems.md

-----Original Message-----
From: Dalibor Topic <dalibor.topic at oracle.com> 
Sent: Friday, June 26, 2020 8:07 AM
To: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat.com>; Mario Torre <neugens at redhat.com>
Cc: Monica Beckwith <Monica.Beckwith at microsoft.com>; hotspot-runtime-dev at openjdk.java.net; aarch64-port-dev at openjdk.java.net; openjdk-aarch64 <openjdk-aarch64 at microsoft.com>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [aarch64-port-dev ] OpenJDK extension to AArch64 and Windows

On 26.06.2020 14:32, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 26/06/2020 13:18, Dalibor Topic wrote:
>> Since there is no aarch64-port repository tracking jdk/jdk yet to 
>> host the port's changes in development (and stage it for a later 
>> merge into mainline once it's ready), I assume that's going to be the 
>> first step in that case.
> Given that the patches are simpler and smaller than many changes that 
> just go into mainline, is there an actual reason for a new repo?

I assume that there would be some work remaining to be done on the port, since it's not quite done yet. For example, the UI layer has not been ported, according to Microsoft, which means that the port is not really fully functional in its current state. [0]

If that's just a matter of days, then sure, I fully understand that you may not want to add a new aarch64-port repo just for that.

On the other hand, if there is a question mark over whether the port would become fully functional in the coming weeks or months, then trying to integrate the port-specific parts of it piecemeal into mainline before that the case ... would seem a bit premature to me.

In that case, an aarch64-port specific jdk/jdk staging repo might be more useful.

dalibor topic


<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.oracle.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7CMonica.Beckwith%40microsoft.com%7C2914f9cc69324198ff0608d819d1eca3%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637287736697879904&sdata=%2FbjvUvv0gpWHeRO%2BSa4%2Btxt3YY3rCf4unXLq%2B0fzvJs%3D&reserved=0> Dalibor Topic Consulting Product Manager
Phone: +494089091214 <tel:+494089091214>, Mobile: +491737185961 <tel:+491737185961>, Video: dalibor.topic at oracle.com <sip:dalibor.topic at oracle.com>

Oracle Global Services Germany GmbH
Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 München
Registergericht: Amtsgericht München, HRB 246209
Geschäftsführer: Ralf Herrmann

More information about the hotspot-runtime-dev mailing list