harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Pavel Ozhdikhin" <pavel.ozhdik...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [general] What platforms do we support?
Date Tue, 03 Apr 2007 03:21:43 GMT
On 4/3/07, Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison@gmail.com> wrote:
> Nathan Beyer wrote:
> > However, from looking back on this mailing list thread, I couldn't
> > find any decision at the end of this or much of a consensus. I would
> > like to pull this together, vote on it. document it (site, Wiki, etc),
> > test it, etc.
> Agreed, let's try and get a consensus on what we will have in our M1
> build, and a date to shoot for it.
> I think we have a reasonable idea forming that it will be (taken from
> your list):
> - IA32/x86 with a minimum of P3 (SSE, not SSE2)
> - IA64/IPF (Intel 64-bit architecture)
> - x86_64/AMD64/EMT64 (AMD architecture)
> - (Windows 2000 SP4?), Windows XP SP2, Windows 2003,
>   Windows 2003 R2, (Windows Vista?)
> - Linux; kernel v2.4.x, v2.6.x
> - (FreeBSD v???)
> I've put some in parentheses since we need to hear from people what work
> is required to get them ready and stable.  I also removed the priority
> order since I think they are all equally important if we declare them
> stable.
> An M1 date of April 30th would give us a stable build ready for
> ApacheCon EU and JavaOne, which seems like a good goal.  Working
> backwards we would then focus on stability for whatever we have got from
> April 23.
> I wonder if the Win2000 goal is possible in that timeframe?  If not I
> suggest we live with WinXP as a minimum requirement for M1.  Do we know
> what it takes to run on Vista/FreeBSD?  Again I'm guessing non-trivial
> work remaining and we should drop it from M1 if so.
> Regards,
> Tim

I think having a milestone we want to show a really fast and stable runtime
environment, not just another snapshot of what we have to the moment. If I'm
correct than 1 week between the feature freeze and release date is not
enough. Working on JIT I see ~30 JIRA issues that may affect real
applications, and running recently contributed test suites will reveal
more. I think we should strive to fix most of them before the milestone,
probably by the cost of limiting number of supported platforms. Then we may
go to the next milestone, including more platforms/configurations.

Having this in mind I propose to release M1 with IA32 support only, may be
even limiting this support to Windows. Let's fix all stability problems
there and then go to the next milestone shortly, including support for Linux
or x86_64. I propose a feature freeze date of 15th of May and put M1 release
date of 15th of June. At the feature freeze we should complete current
development works and move on to stability to release a really mature
runtime. We might have release an "release candidate" before the JavaOne
which will have all the capabilities than our milestone build but without
all stability issues fixed.

I also have comments about configurations:

*- IA32/x86 with a minimum of P3 (SSE, not SSE2)*

SSE+SSE2 unless someone commits to test and complete on pure PIII.
*- IA64/IPF (Intel 64-bit architecture)*

DRLVM is poorly tested on IPF yet. This is rather for M3 milestone.

*- x86_64/AMD64/EMT64 (AMD architecture)*
Let's put this aside for the first release. We have some stability level
there which is supported by CruiseControl and no regression on these
platform is enough for the first release. I'm fine to include this into M1
if someone commit to this.

*- (Windows 2000 SP4?), Windows XP SP2, Windows 2003,
  Windows 2003 R2, (Windows Vista?)*

+ 1 for Windows 2003, Windows XP. It's interesting to try on Vista but I'd
give it some time to "grow up" before we go there.

*- Linux; kernel v2.4.x, v2.6.x*

I'm sure Geir will vote for Linux, but I'm reluctant to put everything in
the first milestone.

*- (FreeBSD v???)

Volunteers? ;-)

Thank you,

Pavel Ozhdikhin

Intel Managed Runtime Division

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message