Current Status of OpenJDK 8 for mips64el

[Ao Qi]

Magnus Ihse Bursie <magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com> 于2018年8月22日周三 下午5:21写道：
>
> 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> 于2018年8月21日周二 下午5:15写道：
> >> 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