On Fri, 5 Apr 2024 12:17:17 GMT, Hamlin Li <m...@openjdk.org> wrote: >> Hi, >> Can you help to review the patch? >> This pr is based on previous work and discussion in [pr >> 16234](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/16234), [pr >> 18294](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/18294). >> >> Compared with previous prs, the major change in this pr is to integrate the >> source of sleef (for the steps, please check >> `src/jdk.incubator.vector/linux/native/libvectormath/README`), rather than >> depends on external sleef things (header or lib) at build or run time. >> Besides of this change, also modify the previous changes accordingly, e.g. >> remove some uncessary files or changes especially in make dir of jdk. >> >> Besides of the code changes, one important task is to handle the legal >> process. >> >> Thanks! > > Hamlin Li has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional > commits since the last revision: > > - disable unused-function warnings; add log msg > - minor
Thank you for the update and for working on this in general. I've started working on JDK-8329816, preparing the change for the SLEEF specific part of the change. Specifically, I'm currently planning on including the three SLEEF header files, the README and a legal/sleef.md file in that change. Let me know if you have any thoughts/concerns. Also, just for my understanding, would love to understand your thoughts on the future here (I apologize if this was already discussed elsewhere): It seem like SLEEF is (sort of) limited to linux at this point (the SLEEF README mentions that "Due to limited test capacities, SLEEF is currently only officially supported on Linux with gcc or llvm/clang." ). That same README does, however, indicate good test coverage on several architectures in addition to aarch64 (including x86_64, PPC, RISC-V). With that in mind, it looks like we could potentially use SLEEF for other architectures on linux in the future? And potentially additional operating systems as well? ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18605#issuecomment-2045972249
