OpenJDK 6 b19 features?

[Joseph D. Darcy]

Gary Benson wrote:
> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>   
>> On 19 February 2010 18:36, Joseph D. Darcy <Joe.Darcy at sun.com> wrote:
>>     
>>> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>>       
>>>> On 18 February 2010 08:27, Gary Benson <gbenson at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>         
>>>>> Does this updated HotSpot have Zero in it?
>>>>>           
>>>> No, the patches were applied to hs17.
>>>>
>>>> We could backport it though.  With hs16, we'll be using what is
>>>> now the alternate HotSpot build for IcedTea6 that is closer to
>>>> the version against which Zero was applied upstream.
>>>>
>>>> Joe, what do you think about making Zero available upstream in
>>>> OpenJDK6?  It already ships with IcedTea6 and builds have passed
>>>> the TCK.
>>>>         
>>> Hmm.  I'm not sure.  What would making Zero available upstream
>>> mean exactly for OpenJDK 6?  I'm inferring Zero in is sufficiently
>>> new versions of HotSpot (hs17 vs hs16) given the presence of a
>>> src/cpu/zero directory in the JDK 7 HotSpot repo.  Would the rough
>>> proposal be to port the Zero fixes applied to hs17 in JDK 7 to the
>>> hs16 in OpenJDK 6?
>>>       
>> It would.  In fact, there would be no work to speak of as IcedTea6
>> already supports applying it to both hs14 and hs16 (the latter being
>> much less work).  Having it upstream would simplify the IcedTea
>> build a little and possibly make it available to more people.
>>
>> I'm sure Gary (Zero's main author) can also make some other good
>> points for its inclusion... :-)
>>     
>
> I wasn't really thinking about backporting the HotSpot part.  What I
> was more concerned with was, if Zero _was_ in the updated HotSpot then
> it would be good to backport the non-HotSpot parts to match.  These
> are 6891677 and 6903453, specifically.
>
> Cheers,
> Gary
>
>   

Hello.

I'd be happy to consider those changes after the HotSpot portions of 
Zero are in OpenJDK 6.

-Joe