From magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com  Tue Aug 21 09:15:16 2018
From: magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com (Magnus Ihse Bursie)
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2018 11:15:16 +0200
Subject: Current Status of OpenJDK 8 for mips64el
In-Reply-To: <CALjzQn6jw5H+rEraZvAOymC_-6LzCNArNtvscAmdjP3uWOqKnA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALjzQn7YboMOFFALCbP+XJLVOKFoLdX83rN7qn_qdC7e8uFwyQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <4093f9b9-2159-e4c0-9359-fd5f66c9ec46@oracle.com>
 <CALjzQn6gt9RL-vtxzQL83_ETBsT+dsksN_THRPMJ600yN7qXZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALjzQn6jw5H+rEraZvAOymC_-6LzCNArNtvscAmdjP3uWOqKnA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2b82faaf-f4de-3d9b-8a74-b9d1b643e6c5@oracle.com>

The current mips-port project is more or less abandoned. There is just 
Dalibor as lead, and no other registrered contributors. [1] No serious 
activitity has happend on the mailing lists for years, and there is not 
even a hg repository associated with the project.

It does seem like a good idea to revive it for bringing in your mips 
port into a more current version of OpenJDK.

I would suggest that, if Dalibor is happy with it, he should pass on the 
role as mips-port lead to you, since you are actively pursuing the mips 
port at this point.

In any case, the first thing to to is for the mips-port lead to request 
a new repository for the up to date port. The project lead needs to send 
a mail to ops at openjdk.java.net and specify the name of the repository. 
My suggestion would be "mips-port/jdk" if the intention is to track the 
current jdk/jdk master, or "mips-port/jdk11" (or jdk8, or ...) if the 
intention is to track a specific, released, version.

Once a repo is in place, I can give further guidance in how to proceed.

[1] http://openjdk.java.net/census#mips-port

On 2018-07-26 18:01, Ao Qi wrote:
> Hi Dalibor,
>
> Ping?
>
> Could you suggest me what should I do for bringing the port into the
> MIPS Porting Project?
>
> Thanks,
> Ao Qi
> Ao Qi <aoqi at loongson.cn> ?2018?6?19??? ??4:28???
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I think that it's too late for a new a port come into JDK 8 Updates Project
>>> at this time, with less then a year to go under the current maintainers,
>>> considering how long it would take to bring the code into OpenJDK, run
>>> through the JEP process, code reviews, etc.
>>>
>>> It's probably too late for a fresh port to make it into JDK 11, as well,
>>> with less than a month to go until rampdown starts.
>>>
>> Thank you very much for your reply and suggestion. I understand that
>> it is too late for a new port to be into the main line of jdk8u and
>> jdk11.
>>
>>> So my suggestion would be to start by bringing your port into the MIPS
>>> Porting Project, and then, once it's brought forward to JDK 11 and there is
>>> a build passing JCK for Java SE 11, to go through the JEP process for
>>> inclusion in a later version of the JDK.
>>>
>> I think your suggestion is very reasonable, helpful and acceptable. We
>> are willing to adopt your suggestion. However, I have one question
>> about your suggestion. Could you explain more about bringing our port
>> into the MIPS Porting Project? I'm not quite sure what it specifically
>> means. Is that we can put our code into OpenJDK repository (not the
>> main line) like aarh64 jdk8u[1] and the further development should
>> happened according to community requirements, such as [2][3]?
>>
>> [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port
>> [2] http://openjdk.java.net/bylaws
>> [3] http://openjdk.java.net/contribute
>>
>>> cheers,
>>> dalibor topic
>>>


From aoqi at loongson.cn  Tue Aug 21 17:33:52 2018
From: aoqi at loongson.cn (Ao Qi)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2018 01:33:52 +0800
Subject: Current Status of OpenJDK 8 for mips64el
In-Reply-To: <2b82faaf-f4de-3d9b-8a74-b9d1b643e6c5@oracle.com>
References: <CALjzQn7YboMOFFALCbP+XJLVOKFoLdX83rN7qn_qdC7e8uFwyQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <4093f9b9-2159-e4c0-9359-fd5f66c9ec46@oracle.com>
 <CALjzQn6gt9RL-vtxzQL83_ETBsT+dsksN_THRPMJ600yN7qXZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALjzQn6jw5H+rEraZvAOymC_-6LzCNArNtvscAmdjP3uWOqKnA@mail.gmail.com>
 <2b82faaf-f4de-3d9b-8a74-b9d1b643e6c5@oracle.com>
Message-ID: <CALjzQn68CsYSNtKUKr5Bdd8HwKMGz-kBRXQ0tq2SEdWDTxt-qA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Magnus,

Thanks for you reply. Please see inline:

Magnus Ihse Bursie <magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com> ?2018?8?21??? ??5:15???
>
> The current mips-port project is more or less abandoned. There is just
> Dalibor as lead, and no other registrered contributors. [1] No serious
> activitity has happend on the mailing lists for years, and there is not
> even a hg repository associated with the project.
>
> It does seem like a good idea to revive it for bringing in your mips
> port into a more current version of OpenJDK.
>
> I would suggest that, if Dalibor is happy with it, he should pass on the
> role as mips-port lead to you, since you are actively pursuing the mips
> port at this point.
>

If possible, I am willing to take this responsibility.

> In any case, the first thing to to is for the mips-port lead to request
> a new repository for the up to date port. The project lead needs to send
> a mail to ops at openjdk.java.net and specify the name of the repository.
> My suggestion would be "mips-port/jdk" if the intention is to track the
> current jdk/jdk master, or "mips-port/jdk11" (or jdk8, or ...) if the
> intention is to track a specific, released, version.
>

I support this suggestion. We already have a jdk8 MIPS64 port and we
will maintain it for a long time, so I think mips-port/jdk8 or
mips-port/jdk8u may be needed. I do have plans to upgrade our port to
the latest jdk/jdk master. Actually, I have done some research and
experiment in the past few days. However, I can't guarantee how long
it will take to get the job done.

I have one question about the name. Our port is for MIPS64, and I know
some companies are doing MIPS32 port. I am not sure whether they will
upstream their work. If yes, it is not known yet that whether the code
is merged into "mips-port/jdk11" (or jdk8, or ...)  or into different
repositories. So which name (mips-port or mips64-port) are more
suitable for the current situation?

> Once a repo is in place, I can give further guidance in how to proceed.

Thank you.

Cheers,
Ao Qi

>
> [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census#mips-port
>
> On 2018-07-26 18:01, Ao Qi wrote:
> > Hi Dalibor,
> >
> > Ping?
> >
> > Could you suggest me what should I do for bringing the port into the
> > MIPS Porting Project?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ao Qi
> > Ao Qi <aoqi at loongson.cn> ?2018?6?19??? ??4:28???
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I think that it's too late for a new a port come into JDK 8 Updates Project
> >>> at this time, with less then a year to go under the current maintainers,
> >>> considering how long it would take to bring the code into OpenJDK, run
> >>> through the JEP process, code reviews, etc.
> >>>
> >>> It's probably too late for a fresh port to make it into JDK 11, as well,
> >>> with less than a month to go until rampdown starts.
> >>>
> >> Thank you very much for your reply and suggestion. I understand that
> >> it is too late for a new port to be into the main line of jdk8u and
> >> jdk11.
> >>
> >>> So my suggestion would be to start by bringing your port into the MIPS
> >>> Porting Project, and then, once it's brought forward to JDK 11 and there is
> >>> a build passing JCK for Java SE 11, to go through the JEP process for
> >>> inclusion in a later version of the JDK.
> >>>
> >> I think your suggestion is very reasonable, helpful and acceptable. We
> >> are willing to adopt your suggestion. However, I have one question
> >> about your suggestion. Could you explain more about bringing our port
> >> into the MIPS Porting Project? I'm not quite sure what it specifically
> >> means. Is that we can put our code into OpenJDK repository (not the
> >> main line) like aarh64 jdk8u[1] and the further development should
> >> happened according to community requirements, such as [2][3]?
> >>
> >> [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port
> >> [2] http://openjdk.java.net/bylaws
> >> [3] http://openjdk.java.net/contribute
> >>
> >>> cheers,
> >>> dalibor topic
> >>>
>

From magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com  Wed Aug 22 09:21:56 2018
From: magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com (Magnus Ihse Bursie)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2018 11:21:56 +0200
Subject: Current Status of OpenJDK 8 for mips64el
In-Reply-To: <CALjzQn68CsYSNtKUKr5Bdd8HwKMGz-kBRXQ0tq2SEdWDTxt-qA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALjzQn7YboMOFFALCbP+XJLVOKFoLdX83rN7qn_qdC7e8uFwyQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <4093f9b9-2159-e4c0-9359-fd5f66c9ec46@oracle.com>
 <CALjzQn6gt9RL-vtxzQL83_ETBsT+dsksN_THRPMJ600yN7qXZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALjzQn6jw5H+rEraZvAOymC_-6LzCNArNtvscAmdjP3uWOqKnA@mail.gmail.com>
 <2b82faaf-f4de-3d9b-8a74-b9d1b643e6c5@oracle.com>
 <CALjzQn68CsYSNtKUKr5Bdd8HwKMGz-kBRXQ0tq2SEdWDTxt-qA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <eca2309a-ded7-bbb4-d414-a1416b82b6fe@oracle.com>

On 2018-08-21 19:33, Ao Qi wrote:
> Hi Magnus,
>
> Thanks for you reply. Please see inline:
>
> Magnus Ihse Bursie <magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com> ?2018?8?21??? ??5:15???
>> The current mips-port project is more or less abandoned. There is just
>> Dalibor as lead, and no other registrered contributors. [1] No serious
>> activitity has happend on the mailing lists for years, and there is not
>> even a hg repository associated with the project.
>>
>> It does seem like a good idea to revive it for bringing in your mips
>> port into a more current version of OpenJDK.
>>
>> I would suggest that, if Dalibor is happy with it, he should pass on the
>> role as mips-port lead to you, since you are actively pursuing the mips
>> port at this point.
>>
> If possible, I am willing to take this responsibility.
That sounds good!

Formally, Dalibor would need to resign as Project Lead. Then, a new 
Project Lead can be nominated and voted upon by the Group Leads of the 
sponsoring groups. In this case, the Porters Group is the sole sponsor, 
so the Project Lead can elect a new Project Lead in a single stroke. :-) 
And, conveniently, the Group Lead of the Porters Group is also Dalibor, 
so he can do all of this in a single email. ;-)

>> In any case, the first thing to to is for the mips-port lead to request
>> a new repository for the up to date port. The project lead needs to send
>> a mail to ops at openjdk.java.net and specify the name of the repository.
>> My suggestion would be "mips-port/jdk" if the intention is to track the
>> current jdk/jdk master, or "mips-port/jdk11" (or jdk8, or ...) if the
>> intention is to track a specific, released, version.
>>
> I support this suggestion. We already have a jdk8 MIPS64 port and we
> will maintain it for a long time, so I think mips-port/jdk8 or
> mips-port/jdk8u may be needed.
If you intend to track jdk8u (which I recommend), then you should name 
it after that.

> I do have plans to upgrade our port to
> the latest jdk/jdk master. Actually, I have done some research and
> experiment in the past few days. However, I can't guarantee how long
> it will take to get the job done.
Then it's just as well to request a mips-port/jdk repo while you're at 
it, I think.

>
> I have one question about the name. Our port is for MIPS64, and I know
> some companies are doing MIPS32 port. I am not sure whether they will
> upstream their work. If yes, it is not known yet that whether the code
> is merged into "mips-port/jdk11" (or jdk8, or ...)  or into different
> repositories. So which name (mips-port or mips64-port) are more
> suitable for the current situation?

Unless there's a requirement that repo names must match the project 
names, it sounds like mips64-port is more logical. Such matching seem to 
be the general rule, but otoh I find repos that does not fit project 
names either, so maybe it's a flexible rule.

Even if no mips32 port ever materializes, I think this is a good choice 
of name. If your port is only supporting mips64 and you have no 
intention of doing anything different, then it's better to be explicit. 
That way everyone's expectations on the port is at the right level.

/Magnus

>> Once a repo is in place, I can give further guidance in how to proceed.
> Thank you.
>
> Cheers,
> Ao Qi
>
>> [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census#mips-port
>>
>> On 2018-07-26 18:01, Ao Qi wrote:
>>> Hi Dalibor,
>>>
>>> Ping?
>>>
>>> Could you suggest me what should I do for bringing the port into the
>>> MIPS Porting Project?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Ao Qi
>>> Ao Qi <aoqi at loongson.cn> ?2018?6?19??? ??4:28???
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that it's too late for a new a port come into JDK 8 Updates Project
>>>>> at this time, with less then a year to go under the current maintainers,
>>>>> considering how long it would take to bring the code into OpenJDK, run
>>>>> through the JEP process, code reviews, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's probably too late for a fresh port to make it into JDK 11, as well,
>>>>> with less than a month to go until rampdown starts.
>>>>>
>>>> Thank you very much for your reply and suggestion. I understand that
>>>> it is too late for a new port to be into the main line of jdk8u and
>>>> jdk11.
>>>>
>>>>> So my suggestion would be to start by bringing your port into the MIPS
>>>>> Porting Project, and then, once it's brought forward to JDK 11 and there is
>>>>> a build passing JCK for Java SE 11, to go through the JEP process for
>>>>> inclusion in a later version of the JDK.
>>>>>
>>>> I think your suggestion is very reasonable, helpful and acceptable. We
>>>> are willing to adopt your suggestion. However, I have one question
>>>> about your suggestion. Could you explain more about bringing our port
>>>> into the MIPS Porting Project? I'm not quite sure what it specifically
>>>> means. Is that we can put our code into OpenJDK repository (not the
>>>> main line) like aarh64 jdk8u[1] and the further development should
>>>> happened according to community requirements, such as [2][3]?
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port
>>>> [2] http://openjdk.java.net/bylaws
>>>> [3] http://openjdk.java.net/contribute
>>>>
>>>>> cheers,
>>>>> dalibor topic
>>>>>


From aoqi at loongson.cn  Mon Aug 27 14:32:27 2018
From: aoqi at loongson.cn (Ao Qi)
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 22:32:27 +0800
Subject: Current Status of OpenJDK 8 for mips64el
In-Reply-To: <eca2309a-ded7-bbb4-d414-a1416b82b6fe@oracle.com>
References: <CALjzQn7YboMOFFALCbP+XJLVOKFoLdX83rN7qn_qdC7e8uFwyQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <4093f9b9-2159-e4c0-9359-fd5f66c9ec46@oracle.com>
 <CALjzQn6gt9RL-vtxzQL83_ETBsT+dsksN_THRPMJ600yN7qXZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALjzQn6jw5H+rEraZvAOymC_-6LzCNArNtvscAmdjP3uWOqKnA@mail.gmail.com>
 <2b82faaf-f4de-3d9b-8a74-b9d1b643e6c5@oracle.com>
 <CALjzQn68CsYSNtKUKr5Bdd8HwKMGz-kBRXQ0tq2SEdWDTxt-qA@mail.gmail.com>
 <eca2309a-ded7-bbb4-d414-a1416b82b6fe@oracle.com>
Message-ID: <CALjzQn43qu0xccpZr1ioxPkkNL3VBZ6V_xRM+OG8C+Y2OxePgA@mail.gmail.com>

Magnus Ihse Bursie <magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com> ?2018?8?22??? ??5:21???
>
> On 2018-08-21 19:33, Ao Qi wrote:
> > Hi Magnus,
> >
> > Thanks for you reply. Please see inline:
> >
> > Magnus Ihse Bursie <magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com> ?2018?8?21??? ??5:15???
> >> The current mips-port project is more or less abandoned. There is just
> >> Dalibor as lead, and no other registrered contributors. [1] No serious
> >> activitity has happend on the mailing lists for years, and there is not
> >> even a hg repository associated with the project.
> >>
> >> It does seem like a good idea to revive it for bringing in your mips
> >> port into a more current version of OpenJDK.
> >>
> >> I would suggest that, if Dalibor is happy with it, he should pass on the
> >> role as mips-port lead to you, since you are actively pursuing the mips
> >> port at this point.
> >>
> > If possible, I am willing to take this responsibility.
> That sounds good!
>
> Formally, Dalibor would need to resign as Project Lead. Then, a new
> Project Lead can be nominated and voted upon by the Group Leads of the
> sponsoring groups. In this case, the Porters Group is the sole sponsor,
> so the Project Lead can elect a new Project Lead in a single stroke. :-)
> And, conveniently, the Group Lead of the Porters Group is also Dalibor,
> so he can do all of this in a single email. ;-)
>
> >> In any case, the first thing to to is for the mips-port lead to request
> >> a new repository for the up to date port. The project lead needs to send
> >> a mail to ops at openjdk.java.net and specify the name of the repository.
> >> My suggestion would be "mips-port/jdk" if the intention is to track the
> >> current jdk/jdk master, or "mips-port/jdk11" (or jdk8, or ...) if the
> >> intention is to track a specific, released, version.
> >>
> > I support this suggestion. We already have a jdk8 MIPS64 port and we
> > will maintain it for a long time, so I think mips-port/jdk8 or
> > mips-port/jdk8u may be needed.
> If you intend to track jdk8u (which I recommend), then you should name
> it after that.
>

In this case, "mips-port/jdk8" should be created first, then another
"mips-port/jdk8u" should be created for upgrade and maintenance? Do I
understand it right?

> > I do have plans to upgrade our port to
> > the latest jdk/jdk master. Actually, I have done some research and
> > experiment in the past few days. However, I can't guarantee how long
> > it will take to get the job done.
> Then it's just as well to request a mips-port/jdk repo while you're at
> it, I think.
>

I think we can do this work (upgrade to the jdk/jdk master) internally
in our company. When it is done, then I try to request a mips-port/jdk
repo or even request to merge into the master.

> >
> > I have one question about the name. Our port is for MIPS64, and I know
> > some companies are doing MIPS32 port. I am not sure whether they will
> > upstream their work. If yes, it is not known yet that whether the code
> > is merged into "mips-port/jdk11" (or jdk8, or ...)  or into different
> > repositories. So which name (mips-port or mips64-port) are more
> > suitable for the current situation?
>
> Unless there's a requirement that repo names must match the project
> names, it sounds like mips64-port is more logical. Such matching seem to
> be the general rule, but otoh I find repos that does not fit project
> names either, so maybe it's a flexible rule.
>
> Even if no mips32 port ever materializes, I think this is a good choice
> of name. If your port is only supporting mips64 and you have no
> intention of doing anything different, then it's better to be explicit.
> That way everyone's expectations on the port is at the right level.
>

Currently we mainly focus on MIPS64.

However, if some one is doing MIPS32 port, we are willing to help and
contribute:)

Magnus, thanks!


> /Magnus
>
> >> Once a repo is in place, I can give further guidance in how to proceed.
> > Thank you.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Ao Qi
> >
> >> [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census#mips-port

From magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com  Tue Aug 28 06:33:32 2018
From: magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com (Magnus Ihse Bursie)
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 08:33:32 +0200
Subject: Current Status of OpenJDK 8 for mips64el
In-Reply-To: <CALjzQn43qu0xccpZr1ioxPkkNL3VBZ6V_xRM+OG8C+Y2OxePgA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALjzQn7YboMOFFALCbP+XJLVOKFoLdX83rN7qn_qdC7e8uFwyQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <4093f9b9-2159-e4c0-9359-fd5f66c9ec46@oracle.com>
 <CALjzQn6gt9RL-vtxzQL83_ETBsT+dsksN_THRPMJ600yN7qXZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALjzQn6jw5H+rEraZvAOymC_-6LzCNArNtvscAmdjP3uWOqKnA@mail.gmail.com>
 <2b82faaf-f4de-3d9b-8a74-b9d1b643e6c5@oracle.com>
 <CALjzQn68CsYSNtKUKr5Bdd8HwKMGz-kBRXQ0tq2SEdWDTxt-qA@mail.gmail.com>
 <eca2309a-ded7-bbb4-d414-a1416b82b6fe@oracle.com>
 <CALjzQn43qu0xccpZr1ioxPkkNL3VBZ6V_xRM+OG8C+Y2OxePgA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <9926ecbe-83de-5d8c-7c7a-341b76c3da60@oracle.com>


On 2018-08-27 16:32, Ao Qi wrote:
> Magnus Ihse Bursie <magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com> ?2018?8?22??? ??5:21???
>> On 2018-08-21 19:33, Ao Qi wrote:
>>> Hi Magnus,
>>>
>>> Thanks for you reply. Please see inline:
>>>
>>> Magnus Ihse Bursie <magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com> ?2018?8?21??? ??5:15???
>>>> The current mips-port project is more or less abandoned. There is just
>>>> Dalibor as lead, and no other registrered contributors. [1] No serious
>>>> activitity has happend on the mailing lists for years, and there is not
>>>> even a hg repository associated with the project.
>>>>
>>>> It does seem like a good idea to revive it for bringing in your mips
>>>> port into a more current version of OpenJDK.
>>>>
>>>> I would suggest that, if Dalibor is happy with it, he should pass on the
>>>> role as mips-port lead to you, since you are actively pursuing the mips
>>>> port at this point.
>>>>
>>> If possible, I am willing to take this responsibility.
>> That sounds good!
>>
>> Formally, Dalibor would need to resign as Project Lead. Then, a new
>> Project Lead can be nominated and voted upon by the Group Leads of the
>> sponsoring groups. In this case, the Porters Group is the sole sponsor,
>> so the Project Lead can elect a new Project Lead in a single stroke. :-)
>> And, conveniently, the Group Lead of the Porters Group is also Dalibor,
>> so he can do all of this in a single email. ;-)
>>
>>>> In any case, the first thing to to is for the mips-port lead to request
>>>> a new repository for the up to date port. The project lead needs to send
>>>> a mail to ops at openjdk.java.net and specify the name of the repository.
>>>> My suggestion would be "mips-port/jdk" if the intention is to track the
>>>> current jdk/jdk master, or "mips-port/jdk11" (or jdk8, or ...) if the
>>>> intention is to track a specific, released, version.
>>>>
>>> I support this suggestion. We already have a jdk8 MIPS64 port and we
>>> will maintain it for a long time, so I think mips-port/jdk8 or
>>> mips-port/jdk8u may be needed.
>> If you intend to track jdk8u (which I recommend), then you should name
>> it after that.
>>
> In this case, "mips-port/jdk8" should be created first, then another
> "mips-port/jdk8u" should be created for upgrade and maintenance? Do I
> understand it right?
I don't think you need a jdk8 repo as such. The "upstream" repo is just 
a historical fact, frozen at time of GA. You only need a jdk8u.


>
>>> I do have plans to upgrade our port to
>>> the latest jdk/jdk master. Actually, I have done some research and
>>> experiment in the past few days. However, I can't guarantee how long
>>> it will take to get the job done.
>> Then it's just as well to request a mips-port/jdk repo while you're at
>> it, I think.
>>
> I think we can do this work (upgrade to the jdk/jdk master) internally
> in our company. When it is done, then I try to request a mips-port/jdk
> repo or even request to merge into the master.

Merging mips64 into master is a long-term project. A mips-port repo is 
definitely a needed first step on that road.

>
>>> I have one question about the name. Our port is for MIPS64, and I know
>>> some companies are doing MIPS32 port. I am not sure whether they will
>>> upstream their work. If yes, it is not known yet that whether the code
>>> is merged into "mips-port/jdk11" (or jdk8, or ...)  or into different
>>> repositories. So which name (mips-port or mips64-port) are more
>>> suitable for the current situation?
>> Unless there's a requirement that repo names must match the project
>> names, it sounds like mips64-port is more logical. Such matching seem to
>> be the general rule, but otoh I find repos that does not fit project
>> names either, so maybe it's a flexible rule.
>>
>> Even if no mips32 port ever materializes, I think this is a good choice
>> of name. If your port is only supporting mips64 and you have no
>> intention of doing anything different, then it's better to be explicit.
>> That way everyone's expectations on the port is at the right level.
>>
> Currently we mainly focus on MIPS64.
>
> However, if some one is doing MIPS32 port, we are willing to help and
> contribute:)
Seeing that no-one has been interested in mips32 for a long time, that 
does not seem likely. I'd recommend using mips64. A future mips-32 port 
will probably need to start over in a new repo, from a different level.

/Magnus

>
> Magnus, thanks!
>
>
>> /Magnus
>>
>>>> Once a repo is in place, I can give further guidance in how to proceed.
>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Ao Qi
>>>
>>>> [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census#mips-port


From dalibor.topic at oracle.com  Tue Aug 28 09:47:05 2018
From: dalibor.topic at oracle.com (dalibor topic)
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 11:47:05 +0200
Subject: Current Status of OpenJDK 8 for mips64el
In-Reply-To: <CALjzQn6jw5H+rEraZvAOymC_-6LzCNArNtvscAmdjP3uWOqKnA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALjzQn7YboMOFFALCbP+XJLVOKFoLdX83rN7qn_qdC7e8uFwyQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <4093f9b9-2159-e4c0-9359-fd5f66c9ec46@oracle.com>
 <CALjzQn6gt9RL-vtxzQL83_ETBsT+dsksN_THRPMJ600yN7qXZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALjzQn6jw5H+rEraZvAOymC_-6LzCNArNtvscAmdjP3uWOqKnA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2daa4d83-0ce3-cb6a-71ae-7715d7403ee7@oracle.com>

Hi Ao,

as discussed at OCW, I need to first talk about the actual process with 
others first, in order to ensure that this complex contribution 
developed outside of OpenJDK can be accepted in the MIPS port project. 
Your case is particularly complex, since there are multiple parties 
involved in the development of the code.

Once the summer vacation season is over, I'll be able to come back to 
the you with a concrete proposal on how to organize the contribution.

Once a proposal is discussed and agreed upon, then, given that the port 
was developed outside of OpenJDK for 8 years, I expect that it will take 
some time to go through its commit history, and remove what can't be 
contributed.

Then we can discuss transitioning project roles, etc.

cheers,
dalibor topic

On 26.07.2018 18:01, Ao Qi wrote:
> Hi Dalibor,
> 
> Ping?
> 
> Could you suggest me what should I do for bringing the port into the
> MIPS Porting Project?
> 
> Thanks,
> Ao Qi
> Ao Qi <aoqi at loongson.cn> ?2018?6?19??? ??4:28???
>>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I think that it's too late for a new a port come into JDK 8 Updates Project
>>> at this time, with less then a year to go under the current maintainers,
>>> considering how long it would take to bring the code into OpenJDK, run
>>> through the JEP process, code reviews, etc.
>>>
>>> It's probably too late for a fresh port to make it into JDK 11, as well,
>>> with less than a month to go until rampdown starts.
>>>
>>
>> Thank you very much for your reply and suggestion. I understand that
>> it is too late for a new port to be into the main line of jdk8u and
>> jdk11.
>>
>>> So my suggestion would be to start by bringing your port into the MIPS
>>> Porting Project, and then, once it's brought forward to JDK 11 and there is
>>> a build passing JCK for Java SE 11, to go through the JEP process for
>>> inclusion in a later version of the JDK.
>>>
>>
>> I think your suggestion is very reasonable, helpful and acceptable. We
>> are willing to adopt your suggestion. However, I have one question
>> about your suggestion. Could you explain more about bringing our port
>> into the MIPS Porting Project? I'm not quite sure what it specifically
>> means. Is that we can put our code into OpenJDK repository (not the
>> main line) like aarh64 jdk8u[1] and the further development should
>> happened according to community requirements, such as [2][3]?
>>
>> [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port
>> [2] http://openjdk.java.net/bylaws
>> [3] http://openjdk.java.net/contribute
>>
>>> cheers,
>>> dalibor topic
>>>
>>>>

-- 
<http://www.oracle.com> Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager
Phone: +494089091214 <tel:+494089091214> | Mobile: +491737185961
<tel:+491737185961>

ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | K?hneh?fe 5 | 22761 Hamburg

ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG
Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 M?nchen
Registergericht: Amtsgericht M?nchen, HRA 95603

Komplement?rin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V.
Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande
Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697
Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Alexander van der Ven, Jan Schultheiss, Val Maher

<http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Oracle is committed to developing
practices and products that help protect the environment

From aoqi at loongson.cn  Wed Aug 29 13:52:27 2018
From: aoqi at loongson.cn (Ao Qi)
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2018 21:52:27 +0800
Subject: Current Status of OpenJDK 8 for mips64el
In-Reply-To: <2daa4d83-0ce3-cb6a-71ae-7715d7403ee7@oracle.com>
References: <CALjzQn7YboMOFFALCbP+XJLVOKFoLdX83rN7qn_qdC7e8uFwyQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <4093f9b9-2159-e4c0-9359-fd5f66c9ec46@oracle.com>
 <CALjzQn6gt9RL-vtxzQL83_ETBsT+dsksN_THRPMJ600yN7qXZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALjzQn6jw5H+rEraZvAOymC_-6LzCNArNtvscAmdjP3uWOqKnA@mail.gmail.com>
 <2daa4d83-0ce3-cb6a-71ae-7715d7403ee7@oracle.com>
Message-ID: <CALjzQn5ima86iszLSzXfivAodTna2UzFhURp1Fe5A3-YkdZCFg@mail.gmail.com>

dalibor topic <dalibor.topic at oracle.com> ?2018?8?28??? ??5:47???
>
> Hi Ao,
>
> as discussed at OCW, I need to first talk about the actual process with
> others first, in order to ensure that this complex contribution
> developed outside of OpenJDK can be accepted in the MIPS port project.
> Your case is particularly complex, since there are multiple parties
> involved in the development of the code.
>

As far as I know, two companies have contributed code. They are Lemote
and Loongson. They both signed OCA in 2016.

> Once the summer vacation season is over, I'll be able to come back to
> the you with a concrete proposal on how to organize the contribution.
>
> Once a proposal is discussed and agreed upon, then, given that the port
> was developed outside of OpenJDK for 8 years, I expect that it will take
> some time to go through its commit history, and remove what can't be
> contributed.
>

Including two years, I started to try to contributed the code to the
community:-) In addition to waiting, what do you suggest me to do?
Could you tell me what can't be contributed, so I can remove them from
now on.

We can discuss this after your vacation. Thanks, and have a nice vacation!

> Then we can discuss transitioning project roles, etc.
>
> cheers,
> dalibor topic
>
> On 26.07.2018 18:01, Ao Qi wrote:
> > Hi Dalibor,
> >
> > Ping?
> >
> > Could you suggest me what should I do for bringing the port into the
> > MIPS Porting Project?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ao Qi
> > Ao Qi <aoqi at loongson.cn> ?2018?6?19??? ??4:28???
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I think that it's too late for a new a port come into JDK 8 Updates Project
> >>> at this time, with less then a year to go under the current maintainers,
> >>> considering how long it would take to bring the code into OpenJDK, run
> >>> through the JEP process, code reviews, etc.
> >>>
> >>> It's probably too late for a fresh port to make it into JDK 11, as well,
> >>> with less than a month to go until rampdown starts.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Thank you very much for your reply and suggestion. I understand that
> >> it is too late for a new port to be into the main line of jdk8u and
> >> jdk11.
> >>
> >>> So my suggestion would be to start by bringing your port into the MIPS
> >>> Porting Project, and then, once it's brought forward to JDK 11 and there is
> >>> a build passing JCK for Java SE 11, to go through the JEP process for
> >>> inclusion in a later version of the JDK.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I think your suggestion is very reasonable, helpful and acceptable. We
> >> are willing to adopt your suggestion. However, I have one question
> >> about your suggestion. Could you explain more about bringing our port
> >> into the MIPS Porting Project? I'm not quite sure what it specifically
> >> means. Is that we can put our code into OpenJDK repository (not the
> >> main line) like aarh64 jdk8u[1] and the further development should
> >> happened according to community requirements, such as [2][3]?
> >>
> >> [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port
> >> [2] http://openjdk.java.net/bylaws
> >> [3] http://openjdk.java.net/contribute
> >>
> >>> cheers,
> >>> dalibor topic
> >>>
> >>>>
>
> --
> <http://www.oracle.com> Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager
> Phone: +494089091214 <tel:+494089091214> | Mobile: +491737185961
> <tel:+491737185961>
>
> ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | K?hneh?fe 5 | 22761 Hamburg
>
> ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG
> Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 M?nchen
> Registergericht: Amtsgericht M?nchen, HRA 95603
>
> Komplement?rin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V.
> Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande
> Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697
> Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Alexander van der Ven, Jan Schultheiss, Val Maher
>
> <http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Oracle is committed to developing
> practices and products that help protect the environment

From aoqi at loongson.cn  Wed Aug 29 14:05:31 2018
From: aoqi at loongson.cn (Ao Qi)
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2018 22:05:31 +0800
Subject: Current Status of OpenJDK 8 for mips64el
In-Reply-To: <8F82EE95-1A47-498F-891C-AB233C25F0B5@gmail.com>
References: <CALjzQn7YboMOFFALCbP+XJLVOKFoLdX83rN7qn_qdC7e8uFwyQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <4093f9b9-2159-e4c0-9359-fd5f66c9ec46@oracle.com>
 <CALjzQn6gt9RL-vtxzQL83_ETBsT+dsksN_THRPMJ600yN7qXZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALjzQn6jw5H+rEraZvAOymC_-6LzCNArNtvscAmdjP3uWOqKnA@mail.gmail.com>
 <2b82faaf-f4de-3d9b-8a74-b9d1b643e6c5@oracle.com>
 <CALjzQn68CsYSNtKUKr5Bdd8HwKMGz-kBRXQ0tq2SEdWDTxt-qA@mail.gmail.com>
 <eca2309a-ded7-bbb4-d414-a1416b82b6fe@oracle.com>
 <CALjzQn43qu0xccpZr1ioxPkkNL3VBZ6V_xRM+OG8C+Y2OxePgA@mail.gmail.com>
 <9926ecbe-83de-5d8c-7c7a-341b76c3da60@oracle.com>
 <8F82EE95-1A47-498F-891C-AB233C25F0B5@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALjzQn7UDuqZVNPq4Hi0HFRW6f34mmBhki9D14x7vBJGDoVzHQ@mail.gmail.com>

Andrey Petushkov <andrey.petushkov at gmail.com> ?2018?8?28??? ??10:37???
>
>
> On 28 Aug 2018, at 09:33, Magnus Ihse Bursie <magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> I have one question about the name. Our port is for MIPS64, and I know
> some companies are doing MIPS32 port. I am not sure whether they will
> upstream their work. If yes, it is not known yet that whether the code
> is merged into "mips-port/jdk11" (or jdk8, or ...)  or into different
> repositories. So which name (mips-port or mips64-port) are more
> suitable for the current situation?
>
> Unless there's a requirement that repo names must match the project
> names, it sounds like mips64-port is more logical. Such matching seem to
> be the general rule, but otoh I find repos that does not fit project
> names either, so maybe it's a flexible rule.
>
> Even if no mips32 port ever materializes, I think this is a good choice
> of name. If your port is only supporting mips64 and you have no
> intention of doing anything different, then it's better to be explicit.
> That way everyone's expectations on the port is at the right level.
>
> Currently we mainly focus on MIPS64.
>
> However, if some one is doing MIPS32 port, we are willing to help and
> contribute:)
>
> Seeing that no-one has been interested in mips32 for a long time, that does not seem likely. I'd recommend using mips64. A future mips-32 port will probably need to start over in a new repo, from a different level.
>
>
> Hi guys,
>
> Indeed yes, Azul Systems develops mips32 port based on Loongson mips64 code. Naturally our supported java version is also 8u. And yes, we?d like to as well contribute our code along with mips64 code from Loongson. Of more precisely, on top, since we have chosen the #ifdef way. So that requires Loongson to be the first to put the code into the repos
>

Hi Andrey Petushkov,

Glad to hear that! Could you tell what is the current status of your
mips32 port?
I have tried to "put the code into the repos" for some time. It is
really a hard work and may take a long time. If Azul and Loongson want
to use the same repo, I think we should start early. I am afraid it
would be hard work to put our codes into one repo after we develop our
own repos for years. I cannot say when our code can be accepted by
upstream, but I think It won't happen soon. Before that, a repo
somewhere outside OpenJDK may be a choice.

> Regards,
> Andrey
>
>
>
> /Magnus
>
>

From andrey.petushkov at gmail.com  Wed Aug 29 14:47:21 2018
From: andrey.petushkov at gmail.com (Andrey Petushkov)
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2018 17:47:21 +0300
Subject: Current Status of OpenJDK 8 for mips64el
In-Reply-To: <CALjzQn7UDuqZVNPq4Hi0HFRW6f34mmBhki9D14x7vBJGDoVzHQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALjzQn7YboMOFFALCbP+XJLVOKFoLdX83rN7qn_qdC7e8uFwyQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <4093f9b9-2159-e4c0-9359-fd5f66c9ec46@oracle.com>
 <CALjzQn6gt9RL-vtxzQL83_ETBsT+dsksN_THRPMJ600yN7qXZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALjzQn6jw5H+rEraZvAOymC_-6LzCNArNtvscAmdjP3uWOqKnA@mail.gmail.com>
 <2b82faaf-f4de-3d9b-8a74-b9d1b643e6c5@oracle.com>
 <CALjzQn68CsYSNtKUKr5Bdd8HwKMGz-kBRXQ0tq2SEdWDTxt-qA@mail.gmail.com>
 <eca2309a-ded7-bbb4-d414-a1416b82b6fe@oracle.com>
 <CALjzQn43qu0xccpZr1ioxPkkNL3VBZ6V_xRM+OG8C+Y2OxePgA@mail.gmail.com>
 <9926ecbe-83de-5d8c-7c7a-341b76c3da60@oracle.com>
 <8F82EE95-1A47-498F-891C-AB233C25F0B5@gmail.com>
 <CALjzQn7UDuqZVNPq4Hi0HFRW6f34mmBhki9D14x7vBJGDoVzHQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <318D242A-1226-4FE7-8056-8F744F0399FD@gmail.com>

Dear Ao,
> On 29 Aug 2018, at 17:05, Ao Qi <aoqi at loongson.cn> wrote:
> 
> Andrey Petushkov <andrey.petushkov at gmail.com <mailto:andrey.petushkov at gmail.com>> ?2018?8?28??? ??10:37???
>> 
>> 
>> On 28 Aug 2018, at 09:33, Magnus Ihse Bursie <magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I have one question about the name. Our port is for MIPS64, and I know
>> some companies are doing MIPS32 port. I am not sure whether they will
>> upstream their work. If yes, it is not known yet that whether the code
>> is merged into "mips-port/jdk11" (or jdk8, or ...)  or into different
>> repositories. So which name (mips-port or mips64-port) are more
>> suitable for the current situation?
>> 
>> Unless there's a requirement that repo names must match the project
>> names, it sounds like mips64-port is more logical. Such matching seem to
>> be the general rule, but otoh I find repos that does not fit project
>> names either, so maybe it's a flexible rule.
>> 
>> Even if no mips32 port ever materializes, I think this is a good choice
>> of name. If your port is only supporting mips64 and you have no
>> intention of doing anything different, then it's better to be explicit.
>> That way everyone's expectations on the port is at the right level.
>> 
>> Currently we mainly focus on MIPS64.
>> 
>> However, if some one is doing MIPS32 port, we are willing to help and
>> contribute:)
>> 
>> Seeing that no-one has been interested in mips32 for a long time, that does not seem likely. I'd recommend using mips64. A future mips-32 port will probably need to start over in a new repo, from a different level.
>> 
>> 
>> Hi guys,
>> 
>> Indeed yes, Azul Systems develops mips32 port based on Loongson mips64 code. Naturally our supported java version is also 8u. And yes, we?d like to as well contribute our code along with mips64 code from Loongson. Of more precisely, on top, since we have chosen the #ifdef way. So that requires Loongson to be the first to put the code into the repos
>> 
> 
> Hi Andrey Petushkov,
> 
> Glad to hear that! Could you tell what is the current status of your
> mips32 port?
The port is almost complete for template interpreter and c2. We?re in bug-fixing phase now
We did not yet started c1. specifically in order to avoid clash with your implementation during the merge
> I have tried to "put the code into the repos" for some time. It is
> really a hard work and may take a long time. If Azul and Loongson want
> to use the same repo, I think we should start early. I am afraid it
> would be hard work to put our codes into one repo after we develop our
> own repos for years. I cannot say when our code can be accepted by
> upstream, but I think It won't happen soon. Before that, a repo
> somewhere outside OpenJDK may be a choice.
Soon we?ll be running our own code clearance tests so the results might be be helpful for you as well, since it should fix (or prove there are no) some of  the concerns OpenJDK government is imposing on the contributions. We?ll let you know the results once they are ready

We did not consider contributing into external repos, although it might make sense. Please let us discuss that internally first

Regards,
Andrey
> 
>> Regards,
>> Andrey
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> /Magnus

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/mips-port/attachments/20180829/23d04d1c/attachment-0001.html>

From aoqi at loongson.cn  Wed Aug 29 15:31:12 2018
From: aoqi at loongson.cn (Ao Qi)
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2018 23:31:12 +0800
Subject: Current Status of OpenJDK 8 for mips64el
In-Reply-To: <318D242A-1226-4FE7-8056-8F744F0399FD@gmail.com>
References: <CALjzQn7YboMOFFALCbP+XJLVOKFoLdX83rN7qn_qdC7e8uFwyQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <4093f9b9-2159-e4c0-9359-fd5f66c9ec46@oracle.com>
 <CALjzQn6gt9RL-vtxzQL83_ETBsT+dsksN_THRPMJ600yN7qXZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALjzQn6jw5H+rEraZvAOymC_-6LzCNArNtvscAmdjP3uWOqKnA@mail.gmail.com>
 <2b82faaf-f4de-3d9b-8a74-b9d1b643e6c5@oracle.com>
 <CALjzQn68CsYSNtKUKr5Bdd8HwKMGz-kBRXQ0tq2SEdWDTxt-qA@mail.gmail.com>
 <eca2309a-ded7-bbb4-d414-a1416b82b6fe@oracle.com>
 <CALjzQn43qu0xccpZr1ioxPkkNL3VBZ6V_xRM+OG8C+Y2OxePgA@mail.gmail.com>
 <9926ecbe-83de-5d8c-7c7a-341b76c3da60@oracle.com>
 <8F82EE95-1A47-498F-891C-AB233C25F0B5@gmail.com>
 <CALjzQn7UDuqZVNPq4Hi0HFRW6f34mmBhki9D14x7vBJGDoVzHQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <318D242A-1226-4FE7-8056-8F744F0399FD@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALjzQn58YrM07GK9EaT4WBC4HfDNRt8tOewc4fszruX3nu6acg@mail.gmail.com>

Andrey Petushkov <andrey.petushkov at gmail.com> ?2018?8?29??? ??10:47???
>
> Dear Ao,
>
> On 29 Aug 2018, at 17:05, Ao Qi <aoqi at loongson.cn> wrote:
>
> Andrey Petushkov <andrey.petushkov at gmail.com> ?2018?8?28??? ??10:37???
>
>
>
> On 28 Aug 2018, at 09:33, Magnus Ihse Bursie <magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> I have one question about the name. Our port is for MIPS64, and I know
> some companies are doing MIPS32 port. I am not sure whether they will
> upstream their work. If yes, it is not known yet that whether the code
> is merged into "mips-port/jdk11" (or jdk8, or ...)  or into different
> repositories. So which name (mips-port or mips64-port) are more
> suitable for the current situation?
>
> Unless there's a requirement that repo names must match the project
> names, it sounds like mips64-port is more logical. Such matching seem to
> be the general rule, but otoh I find repos that does not fit project
> names either, so maybe it's a flexible rule.
>
> Even if no mips32 port ever materializes, I think this is a good choice
> of name. If your port is only supporting mips64 and you have no
> intention of doing anything different, then it's better to be explicit.
> That way everyone's expectations on the port is at the right level.
>
> Currently we mainly focus on MIPS64.
>
> However, if some one is doing MIPS32 port, we are willing to help and
> contribute:)
>
> Seeing that no-one has been interested in mips32 for a long time, that does not seem likely. I'd recommend using mips64. A future mips-32 port will probably need to start over in a new repo, from a different level.
>
>
> Hi guys,
>
> Indeed yes, Azul Systems develops mips32 port based on Loongson mips64 code. Naturally our supported java version is also 8u. And yes, we?d like to as well contribute our code along with mips64 code from Loongson. Of more precisely, on top, since we have chosen the #ifdef way. So that requires Loongson to be the first to put the code into the repos
>
>
> Hi Andrey Petushkov,
>
> Glad to hear that! Could you tell what is the current status of your
> mips32 port?
>
> The port is almost complete for template interpreter and c2. We?re in bug-fixing phase now
> We did not yet started c1. specifically in order to avoid clash with your implementation during the merge
>

It's great!

We are doing C1 now. It's in bug-fixing phase. If you are not in a
hurry, you can wait for us.

> I have tried to "put the code into the repos" for some time. It is
> really a hard work and may take a long time. If Azul and Loongson want
> to use the same repo, I think we should start early. I am afraid it
> would be hard work to put our codes into one repo after we develop our
> own repos for years. I cannot say when our code can be accepted by
> upstream, but I think It won't happen soon. Before that, a repo
> somewhere outside OpenJDK may be a choice.
>
> Soon we?ll be running our own code clearance tests so the results might be be helpful for you as well, since it should fix (or prove there are no) some of  the concerns OpenJDK government is imposing on the contributions. We?ll let you know the results once they are ready
>

Thanks! Looking forward that results and the experience from Azul.

> We did not consider contributing into external repos, although it might make sense. Please let us discuss that internally first
>
> Regards,
> Andrey
>
>
> Regards,
> Andrey
>
>
>
> /Magnus
>
>