<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Segoe UI";
panose-1:2 11 5 2 4 2 4 2 2 3;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style>
</head>
<body lang="EN-GB" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Thank you so much for the feedback that everyone has provided so far. I have pushed a handful of changes to the JEP draft to help clarify some points. Most notably, this JEP does
not intend to deprecate any other x86_32 ports.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Thanks<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">George Adams<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">Glavo <zjx001202@gmail.com><br>
<b>Date: </b>Wednesday, 1 March 2023 at 12:08<br>
<b>To: </b>Alan Bateman <Alan.Bateman@oracle.com><br>
<b>Cc: </b>George Adams <George.Adams@microsoft.com>, jdk-dev@openjdk.java.net <jdk-dev@openjdk.java.net><br>
<b>Subject: </b>[EXTERNAL] Re: Proposed JEP - Deprecate the Windows x86-32 Port<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<table class="MsoNormalTable" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" align="left" width="100%" style="width:100.0%;cellpadding:0;cellspacing:0;display:table;border-collapse:seperate;float:none">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background:#A6A6A6;padding:5.25pt 1.5pt 5.25pt 1.5pt;valign:middle"></td>
<td width="100%" style="width:100.0%;background:#EAEAEA;padding:5.25pt 3.75pt 5.25pt 11.25pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-element:frame;mso-element-frame-hspace:2.25pt;mso-element-wrap:around;mso-element-anchor-vertical:paragraph;mso-element-anchor-horizontal:column;mso-height-rule:exactly">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Segoe UI",sans-serif;color:#212121">You don't often get email from zjx001202@gmail.com.
<a href="https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification">Learn why this is important</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</td>
<td width="75" style="width:56.25pt;background:#EAEAEA;padding:5.25pt 3.75pt 5.25pt 3.75pt;align:left">
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">I have seen many Intel Celeron N/J machines with memory <4GiB. Although x86-32 is old, its non-heap memory footprint is lower, so it works better under resource constraints.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">And although Windows 11 does not provide 32-bit images, as far as I know, Microsoft does not plan to give up support for running 32-bit programs on 64-bit systems.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">32-bit programs are still an important part of Windows, a large number of programs are still 32-bit.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">For a considerable number of client applications, upgrading to 64-bit has only negative benefits.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">They only need a little memory and are not sensitive to performance. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">What will 64-bit bring to them? Higher resource consumption and poor compatibility (cannot run on x86-32 or Windows 10 on Arm systems)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">I know that maintaining a port requires a lot of manpower, so I can't ask you to do anything. But I really hope it will continue to be maintained.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 3:15 AM Alan Bateman <<a href="mailto:Alan.Bateman@oracle.com">Alan.Bateman@oracle.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">On 27/02/2023 11:04, George Adams wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#212121">Hi all,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#212121"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#212121">I’ve been asked to socialize my proposed JEP to deprecate the Windows x86-32 port on this mailing list.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#212121"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#212121">A link to the draft JEP can be found here: <a href="https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugs.openjdk.org%2Fbrowse%2FJDK-8303167&data=05%7C01%7CGeorge.Adams%40microsoft.com%7C645a895d36614b8ebfa408db1a4db724%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C638132693333901376%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=DdaeznIQYUT4W4SQ4tlMDVUs3pQupv5mG2LrUYXN6J0%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank"><span style="color:#0078D4">https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8303167</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#212121"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#212121">In summary, the main motivation for this JEP is that there is currently no implementation of <a href="https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fopenjdk.org%2Fjeps%2F436&data=05%7C01%7CGeorge.Adams%40microsoft.com%7C645a895d36614b8ebfa408db1a4db724%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C638132693333901376%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=QD41i%2B7kj3j01c5%2B3b0pRSx6NKY751CUnfrele7Har0%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank" title="Follow link"><span style="color:#0078D4">JEP
436 (Virtual Threads)</span></a> for 32-bit platforms and without a vendor stepping forward to implement this it's unlikely that OpenJDK will be able to continue supporting 32-bit architectures. Another motivation is that Windows 10 (the last Windows operating
system to support a 32-bit installation) will reach EOL on October 14, 20251.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">When you build JDK 19+ to target windows-x86 then it will use an alternative implementation of virtual thread that creates a kernel thread for each virtual thread. So it doesn't
scale but it's good enough for Zero and ports that are a bit behind.<br>
<br>
That said, it's a good topic to bring up. I don't expect dropping windows-x86 will remove the burden of keeping the x86_32 port working, to do that would require dropping linux-x86 too. So maybe the discussion should be broadened to ask if the time is approaching
to remove the x86_32 port? At one point, one of the arguments to keep linux-x86 working was reconditioning older computers but I don't know if this is still the case. I see a mail to jdk-dev from Mark Yagnatinsky that talks about JNI libs or drivers that are
32-bit only. There isn't much context but it would be surprising for something that is actively maintained to not have a 64-bit build in 2023. He also mentions limiting resources but that may be a case where an OS container should be used. It might be that
you expand the Motivation in draft JEP to cover these points.<br>
<br>
-Alan<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>