Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 16:34:21 +0100 From: Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com> To: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com> Cc: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Pthread patches for TLS Message-ID: <200408051634.21312.dfr@nlsystems.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10408051116490.3077-100000@pcnet5.pcnet.com> References: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10408051116490.3077-100000@pcnet5.pcnet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200408051634.21312.dfr>