On Thu, 6 Apr 2023 19:55:07 GMT, Glavo <d...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Roger Riggs has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Remove unneeded qualified export from java.base to jdk.attach
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/util/Architecture.java line 100:
>
>> 98: */
>> 99: public static Architecture current() {
>> 100: return archValues[OperatingSystemProps.CURRENT_ARCH_ORDINAL];
>
> I think the `Architecture ` is different from the `OperatingSystem`. There
> are ports of [other
> architectures](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/1d517afbd4547171ad6fb6a3356351c2554c8279/make/autoconf/platform.m4#L33-L188)
> (Including `MIPS64el`, `LoongArch64`, `SPARC v9`, etc) in the upstream.
>
> Will hard coding architectures destroy these ports? Should a "OTHER" or
> "UNKNOWN" entry be added to the enum to represent other architectures that
> are not of concern?
There is no benefit to preemptively defining a full set of architectures; we
only need those that are used in the OpenJDK runtime selection of options or
parameters.
The other and unknown cases can be handled in code using switch as `default` or
for `if (xx) {} else {...}` in the else clause.
Ports not supported the OpenJDK can add enum values and the corresponding
static `isXXX()` methods if needed.
The template file used in the implementation could be renamed to be more
agnostic to OS or arch.
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13357#discussion_r1160226259
