Backports to jdk11u and jdk17u

Vladimir Kempik vladimir.kempik at
Mon Jan 16 11:02:13 UTC 2023


I know a few independent developers maintaining their own jdk17 risc-v backport.

Combining it in a one riscv-port-jdk17u will allow to save some resources.

However there is one big difference between general jdk17u and riscv secific one: while jdk17u accepts only bug fixes and minor perf improvements, the riscv-port-jdk17u will have to accept larger patches: as risc-v port is far from being perfect so far, performance-wise is worse than arm64 port.

Regards, Vladimir

> 16 янв. 2023 г., в 13:04, Ludovic Henry <ludovic at> написал(а):
> Hello,
> As we are seeing more and more adoption of RISC-V, there is a growing need for users to have access to more versions of Java available on RISC-V. Many organizations are still using Java 11 and Java 17 in production and it would be great to have RISC-V support available for them too. This would allow them to take advantage of the benefits that RISC-V offers by making their codebase more portable.
> Taking a similar approach to AArch64 backports to JDK8u [1], we would want to create the openjdk/riscv-port-jdk11u and openjdk/riscv-port-jdk17u repositories on GitHub. Additionally, we can work with the maintainers of the JDK 11u [2] and JDK 17u [3] projects to ensure there is a possible path to getting it merged.
> Some questions which I'm not sure about yet:
> - Is there a need to backport to JDK 8u?
> - What is the engineering cost of the divergence between JDK8u and JDK head for the backporting effort?
> Looking forward to your feedback,
> Thank you,
> Ludovic
> [1]
> [2]
> [3]

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the riscv-port-dev mailing list