On Wed, 12 Jul 2023 10:58:49 GMT, Jaikiran Pai <j...@openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Can I please get a review for this change which proposes to fix the issue 
>> reported in https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8206890?
>> 
>> The `jlink` command allows a `--endian` option to specify the byte order in 
>> the generated image. Before this change, when such a image was being 
>> launched, the code would assume the byte order in the image to be the native 
>> order of the host where the image is being launched. That would result in 
>> failure to launch java, as noted in the linked issue.
>> 
>> The commit in this PR, changes relevant places to not assume native order 
>> and instead determine the byte order by reading the magic bytes in the image 
>> file's header content.
>> 
>> A new jtreg test has been added which reproduces the issue and verifies the 
>> fix.
>
> Jaikiran Pai has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a 
> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 45 commits:
> 
>  - move copyright before imports in the new test
>  - add a new test for jlink --endian usages
>  - merge latest from master branch
>  - use newly introduced Architecture.byteOrder() API
>  - merge latest from master branch
>  - update jdk.tools.jlink.internal.Platform class to be aware of non-current 
> platform's endianness
>  - remove no longer needed constructor
>  - merge latest from master branch
>  - foo
>  - merge latest from master branch
>  - ... and 35 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/753bd563...962d542d

src/jdk.jlink/share/classes/jdk/tools/jlink/internal/JlinkTask.java line 846:

> 844:                 String targetPlatformVal = 
> readJavaBaseTargetPlatform(cf);
> 845:                 try {
> 846:                     return Platform.parsePlatform(targetPlatformVal);

You may want to modify `Platform.parsePlatform(s)` to use 
`Architecture.lookupByName(s)` instead of doing the alias mapping itself.  
Platform.java:53-56.

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/11943#discussion_r1261280929

Reply via email to