RFR: 8304915: Create jdk.internal.util.Architecture enum and apply [v7]

[Glavo]

On Thu, 6 Apr 2023 19:25:19 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Define an internal jdk.internal.util.Architecture enumeration and static methods to replace uses of the system property `os.arch`.
>> The enumeration values are defined to match those used in the build.
>> The initial values are: `X64, X86, IA64, ARM, AARCH64, RISCV64, S390X, PPC64LE`
>> Note that `amd64` and `x86_64` in the build are represented by `X64`.
>> The values of the system property `os.arch` is unchanged.
>> 
>> The API is similar to the jdk.internal.util.OperatingSystem enum created by #[12931](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/12931).
>> Uses in `java.base` and a few others are included but other modules will be done in separate PRs.
>
> Roger Riggs has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Remove unneeded qualified export from java.base to jdk.attach

src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/util/Architecture.java line 100:

> 98:      */
> 99:     public static Architecture current() {
> 100:         return archValues[OperatingSystemProps.CURRENT_ARCH_ORDINAL];

I think the `Architecture ` is different from the `OperatingSystem`. There are ports of [other architectures](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/1d517afbd4547171ad6fb6a3356351c2554c8279/make/autoconf/platform.m4#L33-L188) (Including `MIPS64el`, `LoongArch64`, `SPARC v9`, etc) in the upstream.

Will hard coding architectures destroy these ports? Should a "OTHER" or "UNKNOWN" entry be added  to the enum to represent other architectures that are not of concern?

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13357#discussion_r1160193842