From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 2 21:16:07 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56CE31065675 for ; Mon, 2 Apr 2012 21:16:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gonzo@hq.bluezbox.com) Received: from hq.bluezbox.com (hq.bluezbox.com [70.38.37.145]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F174D8FC1D for ; Mon, 2 Apr 2012 21:16:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by hq.bluezbox.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.73 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1SEobO-000Ivr-Nd; Mon, 02 Apr 2012 14:15:51 -0700 Message-ID: <4F7A170E.8020209@bluezbox.com> Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2012 14:15:58 -0700 From: Oleksandr Tymoshenko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120327 Thunderbird/11.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, jasone@canonware.com References: <2FF97057-905D-4F02-9138-75680ABC6202@canonware.com> <4F79F020.9070504@freebsd.org> <3C11DB18-1C43-446E-A0BC-FC15C6126819@canonware.com> In-Reply-To: <3C11DB18-1C43-446E-A0BC-FC15C6126819@canonware.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: gonzo@hq.bluezbox.com X-Spam-Level: ---- X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "hq.bluezbox.com", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see The administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On 02/04/2012 1:31 PM, Jason Evans wrote: > On Apr 2, 2012, at 11:29 AM, Oleksandr Tymoshenko wrote: >> On 02/04/2012 11:04 AM, Jason Evans wrote: >>> I've been working on integrating jemalloc back into FreeBSD's libc, and ran into the lack of TLS on ARM and MIPS. Is this something that's likely to be addressed soon? If not, I'm going to have to modify libthr to deal with TSD bootstrapping issues -- FreeBSD's pthreads implementation *loves* to call malloc. =( >>> >>> While I'm asking about TLS, it's worth asking whether any of the other platforms still lack TLS support for non-PIC binaries. If so, that will force the TSD issue anyway. >> >> How old is your source base? >> >> TLS support for ARM and MIPS has been committed about month ago. >> Revisions r232577-r232582 and r233106,r233107 fixes for ARM. > > I'm currently running sources from March 24, but I don't have ARM or MIPS hardware. Can we remove the NO_TLS definitions in src/lib/libc/stdlib/malloc.c? I can't test the result, of course… [...] Content analysis details: (-4.4 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.8 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Cc: Subject: Re: TLS on ARM and MIPS X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2012 21:16:07 -0000 On 02/04/2012 1:31 PM, Jason Evans wrote: > On Apr 2, 2012, at 11:29 AM, Oleksandr Tymoshenko wrote: >> On 02/04/2012 11:04 AM, Jason Evans wrote: >>> I've been working on integrating jemalloc back into FreeBSD's libc, and ran into the lack of TLS on ARM and MIPS. Is this something that's likely to be addressed soon? If not, I'm going to have to modify libthr to deal with TSD bootstrapping issues -- FreeBSD's pthreads implementation *loves* to call malloc. =( >>> >>> While I'm asking about TLS, it's worth asking whether any of the other platforms still lack TLS support for non-PIC binaries. If so, that will force the TSD issue anyway. >> >> How old is your source base? >> >> TLS support for ARM and MIPS has been committed about month ago. >> Revisions r232577-r232582 and r233106,r233107 fixes for ARM. > > I'm currently running sources from March 24, but I don't have ARM or MIPS hardware. Can we remove the NO_TLS definitions in src/lib/libc/stdlib/malloc.c? I can't test the result, of course… How do I test it? Will running buildword on MIPS device with these changes be sufficient? Or do we have specific tests for it?