On Fri, 15 Oct 2021 15:36:14 GMT, Andrew Haley <a...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> The value add of this LLVM-based hsdis is two-fold: >> - It supports platforms that aren't supported by binutils (Windows-AArch64 >> for example) >> - The license being more permissive would allow to build it as part of the >> OpenJDK build more easily (and even maybe ship it?) >> >> LLVM has a strong track record of supporting new platforms (Windows-AArch64 >> and macOS-AArch64 for example, mostly because of investment from Microsoft >> and Apple respectively), and `hsdis` is a necessary tool for porting the >> OpenJDK to any new platform. Since the maintenance is fairly low (small >> codebase, small and knowledgable user base), I would be biased towards >> including it with appropriate warnings. > >> Since the maintenance is fairly low (small codebase, small and knowledgable >> user base), I would be biased towards including it with appropriate warnings. > > I don't think we should commit code that we know is broken. I don't believe > that this view might be controversial. > Maybe someone should try to reproduce the failure I've seen, and then we > should look at fixing it. Maybe it's a local problem. > > Also, this patch breaks all current hsdis builds that follow the installation > instructions. Either we get revised instructions or the build should be fixed. @theRealAph We should not push broken code, and we should not break the existing build of hsdis. I fully agree with this. I will not push this patch until all reviewers are happy, so you don't need to worry about that. :) My initial plan was to get the unix platforms working in this push, and tackle Windows later on, but it seems now that it's better to keep this PR around for a bit longer instead, and fold Windows support into it as well. (Which means I'll wait for Monica to return and being able to test and help out.) I need to understand better why things are failing for you. Can you describe a reproducer? ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/5920
