Shenandoah and aarch64

[Roman Kennke]

> On 12/07/2019 11:08, Andrey Petushkov wrote:
>> Azul fully supports this idea and would like to propose integration of aarch32 port as well, please
>>
>> Regards,
>> Andrey
>>
>>> On 11 Jul 2019, at 19:31, Hohensee, Paul <hohensee at amazon.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> We (Amazon) are interested in pushing both Shenandoah and the aarch64 port to jdk8u and would be willing to do much/most of the work. I believe that both currently reside in http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/ (correct me if not), so to me the easiest approach would be to take both from there. I’d move Shenandoah first, since it presumably has hooks in platform dependent code which we’d have to work around if we did the aarch64 port first.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Paul
>>
> 
> I agree, it would be good to finally see both ports in the main upstream
> repository. Shenandoah as well, though that should go to 11 first.
> 
> The work should use a staging repository, as with JFR, so as to minimise
> disruption to the work on 8u releases.

For the Shenandoah part, would shenandoah/jdk11 work as staging repo? It
seems to be the obvious choice because we already have it, and it is
supposed to only contain the actual difference between upstream jdk11u
and Shenandoah.

For jdk8, I am not quite sure. We do have shenandoah/jdk8. I believe it
probably would make sense to separate the aarch64 integration into 8u
from Shenandoah and not make Aarch64 wait for Shenandoah. In this case,
I think shenandoah/jdk8 would be good as staging for Shenandoah into
jdk8u too.

Roman