Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2012 17:41:36 -0700 From: Oleksandr Tymoshenko <gonzo@bluezbox.com> To: Jason Evans <jasone@canonware.com> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: TLS on ARM and MIPS Message-ID: <4F7B98C0.6090209@bluezbox.com> In-Reply-To: <BE64B52D-B1BA-4107-8D14-D4FAF2C62350@canonware.com> References: <2FF97057-905D-4F02-9138-75680ABC6202@canonware.com> <4F79F020.9070504@freebsd.org> <3C11DB18-1C43-446E-A0BC-FC15C6126819@canonware.com> <4F7A170E.8020209@bluezbox.com> <BE64B52D-B1BA-4107-8D14-D4FAF2C62350@canonware.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 02/04/2012 2:23 PM, Jason Evans wrote: > On Apr 2, 2012, at 2:15 PM, Oleksandr Tymoshenko wrote: >> On 02/04/2012 1:31 PM, Jason Evans wrote: >>> >>> 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? > > I typically two two rounds of buildworld/installworld/reboot to make sure that the newly installed toolchain still works. This paranoia is mainly to catch problems with static binaries, which won't change in this case, so one round is probably enough. I tested it for MIPS - works fine. Unfortunately I don't have ARM hardware that works with HEAD so can't test ARM part of the change.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4F7B98C0.6090209>