On 19/09/2018 07:44, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Bob,
On 18/09/2018 11:17 PM, Bob Vandette wrote:
I only did some basic testing of the hard-float abi. Bell SW has
offered to do more extensive testing
as part of this JEP.
I have no way of knowing if any of the other profiles are being used
but I would think it’s
worth keeping them in the event that someone wants to try to
build/test these other configurations.
The goal of this JEP is to eliminate the arm64 port and not cause any
other changes in behavior.
Sorry I was under the mistaken impression that all of the Oracle ARM
port was being removed, but it is only the 64-bit part.
That said it would concern me greatly if people are still building for
anything older than ARMv7 with MP support! The work I'm doing to always
act as-if MP is not only potentially inefficient on a uniprocessor, but
for ARM variants without MP support, potentially it won't even run if
instructions don't exist. I need to look into this further.
Thanks,
David
David,
My build for arm-sflt needs to run on ARMv5 uniprocessor maschines and my build for arm-vfp-hflt needs to run on ARMv7
uniprocessor machines. Is the work you are doing that could cause problems with this included in JDK11 or just JDK12?
Simon
Bob.
On Sep 17, 2018, at 10:53 PM, David Holmes <david.hol...@oracle.com>
wrote:
Hi Bob,
On 18/09/2018 2:20 AM, Bob Vandette wrote:
Please review the changes related to JEP 340 which remove the second
64-bit ARM port
from the JDK.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bobv/8209093/webrev.01
I’ve testing building the remaining 32 and 64 bit ARM ports
including the minimal, client and server VMs.
I’ve run specJVM98 on the three 32-bit ARM VMs.
Did you test all the ARM related abi-profiles? It seems to me they
were only for Oracle's ARM32 port and may have never been used
otherwise. I would have expected all that stuff to be removed.
Cheers,
David
I also verified that Linux x64 builds.
Bob.
