[aarch64-port-dev ] SUN_ARCH_ABI property not set or in release file for aarch64 builds

Wed Apr 5 14:50:21 UTC 2017

> On 05 Apr 2017, at 17:31, Simon Nash <simon at cjnash.com> wrote:
> 
> On 05/04/2017 14:43, Andrey Petushkov wrote:
>> Dear Simon,
>> Sorry for the delay. I was trying to build the code so that it has the property, but apparently the necessary piece of magic is missing. The location for that piece is only present in the Oracle’s arm port repos, not anywhere else, including stock OpenJDK 8u and 9. I doubt we want to integrate it just because of this property. So we will think how to play around it..
> 
> Thanks for this information.  This is turning out to be more difficult
> than I expected.
The instructions from Bob should not be hard to follow. Although I’m not quite sure the —with-extra-cflags is the best implementation it should be good for you
> 
>>> 03 Apr 2017, at 23:57, Simon Nash <simon at cjnash.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Andrey,
>>> I am using the OpenJDK sources in the aarch32-port repository to build
>>> a JRE for my application, so it will help to have this property set by
>>> this JRE.  I will try my current binary to see whether this property
>>> is already available.
>> If you’re building from Oracle’s port I believe Bob should be able to tell how to bring the magic over. Otherwise please stay tuned, we’ll work on bringing it into the rest of aarch32 repos
> 
> For JDK 8, I am building aarch32-port/jdk8u.  For JDK 9, I was building
> aarch32-port/arm-3264.  Since this has been merged into jdk9/jdk9 I am
> now building jdk9/jdk9 instead.
> 
>>> I have sucessfully built the aarch32-port sources for gnueabihf but I
>>> could not build them for gnueabi becaise there appear to be some missing
>>> files in the aarch32-port sources that are neeeded for softfp support.
>>> Is this correct?  If so, are there any plans to support a softfp version?
>> Could you please indicate what repos are you building from: 8u, 9 or 9-arm3264 (aka Oracle)
> See above.  I have got softfp working with 9-arm3264 but I wasn't able
> to build 8u with softfp because of missing files.
What files are you missing? Could you please elaborate a bit? 
One more question, is softfp is mandatory for you? The reason why I’m asking is that we’re regularly building 8u in soft-float configuration with VFP support in hotspot compiler. It should give almost the same performance as softfp. As what to softfp itself it might be broken, we’re not testing it

Thanks,
Andrey
> 
> Simon
> 
>> Thanks,
>> Andrey
>>> Best regards,
>>> Simon
>>> 
>>> On 03/04/2017 21:45, Andrey Petushkov wrote:
>>>> Hi Simon,
>>>> from the first glance it's set with the command line when the binary is built.  so there is no code change is required but rather build system setup.  we can ensure Azul is building with it so it will propagate into any downstream distribution taking our binaries. yet it might help you or might not depending on what you call the "openjdk build"
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Andrey
>>>> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017, 23:18 Simon Nash <simon at cjnash.com <mailto:simon at cjnash.com>> wrote:
>>>>   On 03/04/2017 17:58, Bob Vandette wrote:
>>>>    > The Oracle binaries for JDK 8 and JDK 9 Linux arm already include
>>>>   this property for the
>>>>    > 32-bit ARM binaries.
>>>>    >
>>>>    > The only release that in question is the 64-bit aarch64 Linux
>>>>   distribution.  There’s really
>>>>    > no need for this property since there’s only 1 ABI that’s widely
>>>>   used today on that
>>>>    > architecture.
>>>>    >
>>>>    > Bob.
>>>>    >
>>>>   My comment was about the OpenJDK aarch32 builds.  From your original
>>>>   post,
>>>>   I have the impression that the OpenJDK aarch32 builds don't set this
>>>>   property.
>>>>   If it could be added for the OpenJDK aarch32 builds, this would be
>>>>   very useful
>>>>   for my application.
>>>>   I understand that this is not needed for aarch64 builds.
>>>>   Simon
>>>>    >> On Apr 3, 2017, at 12:53 PM, Simon Nash <simon at cjnash.com
>>>>   <mailto:simon at cjnash.com>> wrote:
>>>>    >>
>>>>    >> Hi Bob,
>>>>    >> I would find such a property very useful.
>>>>    >>
>>>>    >> My application is mostly written in Java but also uses a native
>>>>   library
>>>>    >> that is loaded dynamically by the Java code.  In order to distribute
>>>>    >> fewer versions of the application and make things simpler for users,
>>>>    >> I have recently started packaging multiple versions of the
>>>>   native library
>>>>    >> (for example, Intel x86 and Intel x64) in a single version of the
>>>>    >> application and using Java runtime properties to determine which of
>>>>    >> these native libraries to load.
>>>>    >>
>>>>    >> I would like to do this for gnueabi and gnueabihf if I could find a
>>>>    >> reliable way to determine at runtime which of these native libraries
>>>>    >> is needed.  It sounds like this property would be an ideal solution.
>>>>    >>
>>>>    >> Best regards,
>>>>    >> Simon
>>>>    >>
>>>>    >> On 03/04/2017 16:57, Bob Vandette wrote:
>>>>    >>> I’m inclined to not fix this bug but thought I’d bring it to
>>>>   your attention just in case.
>>>>    >>> I assume that OpenJDK ARM builds never set this property
>>>>   anyway, right?
>>>>    >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8177976
>>>>   <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8177976>
>>>>    >>> Bob.
>>>>    >
>>>>    >
>