Add support for RISC-V

[luhenry]

Motivation:

RISC-V is gaining traction across the industry and many projects rely on Netty. To run these projects, Netty needs to support RISC-V.

Modifications:

Mostly build scripts and CI files. CentOS doesn't have packages with recent-enough versions for autoconf, automake, libtool, and the GNU compiler toolchain.

Result:

Fixes #13667

linux-riscv64 packages are created in a similar manner to linux-aarch64 packages.

[luhenry]

This PR still depends on brotli4j 1.13.0 to be released with support for RISC-V [1] [2]

[luhenry]

I've verified that it builds with:

1. building and installing locally https://github.com/hyperxpro/Brotli4j/tree/e37831bdc7ff12244561df4d9e984293b71a93e5
2. running docker compose -f docker/docker-compose.centos-7.yaml run cross-compile-riscv64-build

[normanmaurer]

@luhenry there are still some test failures

[Kichura]

The netty tests did not pass, You might wanna correct the code in order to pass the native loading test. (There are also 2 skipped tests aswell)

[luhenry]

@Kichura @normanmaurer looking into the test failure today or tomorrow.

In terms of CI, are you ok with the run taking nearly 2 hours? The newer version of jdk 17.0.9 should be a lot faster given the backport of RISC-V (removing the need for Zero VM), but that’s not done yet in the Ubuntu repositories.

[Kichura]

@Kichura @normanmaurer looking into the test failure today or tomorrow.

In terms of CI, are you ok with the run taking nearly 2 hours? The newer version of jdk 17.0.9 should be a lot faster given the backport of RISC-V (removing the need for Zero VM), but that’s not done yet in the Ubuntu repositories.

Shouldn't be a problem, also for jdk - usually check-latest: true is a choice when aiming for newer jdks in terms of setup-jdk action involvement although unsure if that's comfortable for use in netty's workflow system.

[Kichura]

NativeLoadingEpoll test has failed.

[Kichura]

Consider this extra comment a bit off-topic but is a native ppc64le PR planned aswell or is it out of scope?

[luhenry]

Consider this extra comment a bit off-topic but is a native ppc64le PR planned aswell or is it out of scope?

It's currently out of scope. I can explore it, see how much work it would be, and report back, but I want to prioritize riscv64 in this PR :)

[luhenry]

@Kichura @normanmaurer it's now passing tests on CI.

[Kichura]

Since tests have passed, approving this.

[normanmaurer]

@chrisvest any concerns ?

[chrisvest]

Since this will start making riscv64 release artifacts, we should also include those in all/pom.xml and bom/pom.xml.

[luhenry]

@chrisvest that's fixed now. Sorry I only did it today, I thought I did it 2 weeks ago and was OOO last week.

[chrisvest]

No worries. Approved.

[luhenry]

Thank you!