[aarch64-port-dev ] Topics for next AARCH64 Fireside Chat?

[stewartd.qdt]

I would like to join the discussion and next Tuesday works fine with my schedule. However, going forward Tuesdays & Thursdays are bad for me and would prefer Monday, Wednesday, or Friday for meetings starting in January.

Thanks,
Daniel Stewart

-----Original Message-----
From: aarch64-port-dev [mailto:aarch64-port-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of White, Derek
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2017 1:44 PM
To: Stuart Monteith <stuart.monteith at linaro.org>
Cc: aarch64-port-dev <aarch64-port-dev at openjdk.java.net>
Subject: Re: [aarch64-port-dev ] Topics for next AARCH64 Fireside Chat?

Thanks Stuart,

Next Tuesday (the 19th) at 12 EST works great for Cavium-US. But I can make time Mon-Thurs. Otherwise January it is.

 - Derek

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stuart Monteith [mailto:stuart.monteith at linaro.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2017 10:26 AM
> To: White, Derek <Derek.White at cavium.com>
> Cc: aarch64-port-dev <aarch64-port-dev at openjdk.java.net>
> Subject: Re: [aarch64-port-dev ] Topics for next AARCH64 Fireside Chat?
> 
> Hello Derek,
>   I can certainly set up a meeting. I suggest making a break with the 
> past and not scheduling this on Thursdays. I suggest we either suggest 
> something next week, or in January.
> 
> I just need to know people's preferences. I'm in all week next week, 
> my last day is Friday and return on January 2nd.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BR,
>    Stuart
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 12 December 2017 at 18:24, White, Derek <Derek.White at cavium.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I have some suggestions for topics for our next fireside chat. These 
> > are
> motived by aspects of the new 6-month release cycle:
> >
> >   1.  New features tend to drop in without a lot of warning, so we 
> > should be
> proactive in looking for these features as early as possible.
> >   2.  We have a shorter window to get new aarch64 features into a 
> > release,
> so bigger features may need to be targeted to a release early, and may 
> need a coordinated push to get them in.
> >   3.  And finally, we have more parties working on the aarch64 port, 
> > so we
> don't want to duplicate effort accidentally.
> >
> > As mentioned earlier, I've started tracking these issues on
> >
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1JT3lFsiju60JSU43DWN8NjuCjjNVh
> k
> > p7TltajdJCOr8/edit?usp=sharing
> >
> > Some topics for discussion:
> >
> >   *   Does anyone have further info on which new Java features (JEPs or
> Projects) need porting or testing, or know that they don't need porting?
> >   *   Does anyone want to investigate any of these feature?
> >   *   Is anyone already working on a feature?
> >      *   What is the status of the work?
> >      *   Is help needed?
> >   *   Do people have opinions on the priorities of this porting work?
> >   *   Do we want to explicitly target some of these features for JDK 11, 12, or
> 1024?
> >   *   In particular, I'd like to talk about the Graal related features - AOT and
> JIT.
> >      *   Status of Graal on aarch64.
> >         *   Thanks Redhat!
> >         *   Anyone else pitching in?
> >      *   Is there aarch64 work to be done in hotspot to support AOT/JIT
> (jvmci, etc)?
> >      *   Do we want to target a working AOT or JIT on aarch64 to a particular
> JDK release?
> >      *   Do we need more people to make this happen? For implementation,
> testing, etc.
> >   *   I have concerns about the SIMD/Vector API work going on as part of
> Project Panama, but primarily to get someone to look at the API to 
> make sure it's OK for SVE, not necessarily to implement it soon.
> >
> > Does this sound like enough for a meeting? If so, I'll leave it to 
> > Stuart to set
> things up.
> >
> > Feel free to update the web page or email out questions or status
> beforehand.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> >   *   Derek