Risc V Backports to jdk11u and jdk17u
thomas.stuefe at gmail.com
Mon Jan 16 12:44:01 UTC 2023
Guess I should add it, then...
On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 1:42 PM Thomas Stüfe <thomas.stuefe at gmail.com>
> Adding jdk-updates-dev.
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 12:02 PM Vladimir Kempik <
> vladimir.kempik at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I know a few independent developers maintaining their own jdk17 risc-v
>> 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 rivosinc.com>
>> 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 , 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  and JDK 17u  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,
>>  https://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the riscv-port-dev