Hi, > -----Original Message----- > From: Andrew Haley [mailto:a...@redhat.com] > Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 3:52 PM > To: Yangfei (Felix) <felix.y...@huawei.com>; hotspot-compiler- > d...@openjdk.java.net; core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net > Cc: aarch64-port-...@openjdk.java.net; Stuart Monteith > <stuart.monte...@linaro.org> > Subject: Re: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8252204: AArch64: Implement SHA3 > accelerator/intrinsic > > On 31/08/2020 10:46, Yangfei (Felix) wrote: > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Andrew Haley [mailto:a...@redhat.com] > >> Sent: Monday, August 31, 2020 4:41 PM On 31/08/2020 07:50, Yangfei > >> (Felix) wrote: > >>> > >> > >> This looks like a direct copy of the sha3-cecore.S file.You'll need > >> Linaro to contribute it. I don't imagine they'll have any problem > >> with that: they are OCA signatories > > > >> Also, given that we've got the assembly source file, why not just > >> copy that into OpenJDK? I can't see the point rewriting it into the HotSpot > assembler. > > > > Actually, we referenced the existing intrinsics implementation and > > took a similar way. It looks strange to have one intrinsic that goes > > differently. And we won't be able to emit this code on demand if we > > go that different way. Some cpu does not support these special sha3 > > instructions and thus does need this code at all. I think that's one > > advantage of using a stub. > > OK. But you'll still need Linaro to contribute it to OpenJDK. We could ask > Stuart to help with that.
Sure, I am happy if the original author of the assembly code or someone else from Linaro could help here. I wasn't aware there was such an requirement here given that assembly code is licensed under GPL. Should we separate the patch into two parts: changes for the shared code part and the aarch64 port-specific changes? Thanks, Felix
