From owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 5 15:34:27 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9CDA16A4CE; Thu, 5 Aug 2004 15:34:27 +0000 (GMT) Received: from itchy.rabson.org (mailgate.nlsystems.com [80.177.232.242]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41EC043D45; Thu, 5 Aug 2004 15:34:27 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dfr@nlsystems.com) Received: from ns0.nlsystems.com (ns0.nlsystems.com [80.177.232.243]) by itchy.rabson.org (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i75FYOU1028334; Thu, 5 Aug 2004 16:34:24 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from dfr@nlsystems.com) From: Doug Rabson To: Daniel Eischen Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 16:34:21 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200408051634.21312.dfr@nlsystems.com> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on itchy.rabson.org X-Virus-Scanned: clamd / ClamAV version 0.71, clamav-milter version 0.71 X-Virus-Status: Clean cc: David Xu cc: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Pthread patches for TLS X-BeenThere: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Threading on FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 15:34:28 -0000 On Thursday 05 August 2004 16:19, Daniel Eischen wrote: > On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Daniel Eischen wrote: > > On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Doug Rabson wrote: > > > I haven't tried to support static linked TLS at all. The plan is > > > to get the kernel to size the TLS segment and add extra AUXARGs > > > to report its size, initialiser location and alignment. The stubs > > > in libc/gen/tls.c would be extended to provide support for > > > allocating the TLS blocks in the static case. > > > > > > I was under the impression that no-one particularly wanted to > > > support pthreads in statically linked binaries? > > > > The thread guys don't want to support static thread libraries ;-) > > But I proposed this a few months ago (year?) in -current and there > > was some reluctance. Imp was one that was against it (from what I > > can remember). The reason given was speed of static binaries is > > faster than dynamic. I didn't force the issue any more than that. > > That's how I recall it anyways. I'll have to search the list > > archives to see if I can find the thread. > > Found it. > > > http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/archive/2003/freebsd-arch/20030330.freeb >sd-arch.html > > Look for "Not providing static libraries", Mar 26, 2003, freebsd-arch > > Note that Solaris doesn't have static thread libraries. I'm not sure > about Linux... Looks like I'll have to look into getting TLS to work in the static case. Sigh.