Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 01:49:25 -0500 (EST) From: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com> To: Scott Long <scottl@freebsd.org> Cc: FreeBSD current users <current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: SF Bay area hackfest Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10403240130160.1570-100000@pcnet5.pcnet.com> In-Reply-To: <20040323194312.Y55727@pooker.samsco.home>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 23 Mar 2004, Scott Long wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Mar 2004, Daniel Eischen wrote:
> >
> > For the KSE bits, we've already said a few times that we're
> > ready to go but are waiting for a toolchain upgrade that
> > supports TLS.
> >
> > > going to enforce. I don't want 5.3 to go out with hap-hazard and/or
> > > unfinished TLS support. SO let me start the list, and I'll let you and
> > > others add to it. If we can't get through this step, then there is
> > > absolutely no way that we can expect to get this done for 5.3. And for
> > > the record, I would really, really like to see this done for 5.3.
> >
> > I don't quite understand why you need commitments for a toolchain
> > upgrade. From what I understand, TLS support can't happen without
> > it, and by deferring the toolchain update you prevent it from
> > getting done. But I'll play along regardless...
>
> Operating without a plan or commitments leads us back to 2002 with KSE.
> If TLS needs a new binutils, then we need to figure out who is going to
> provide that. If no one is going to provide it, then the rest is futile,
> no?
Right, but the prerequisite for TLS is a new toolchain, not the
other way around; you don't need TLS support in non-toolchain
components to update the toolchain. Once the toolchain supports
TLS, support for it can be added at any time, regardless of whether
or not it is before or after 5.3. And yes, we (thread-guys) would
like to support it for 5.3 and have said so for quite some time.
We've already rearranged our per-{thread,KSE} storage to allow for
it.
> > > Task Owner
> > >
> > > Import new GCC Alexander Kavaev
> > > Import new binutils ???
> > > Modify loader (image activator?)
> > > to understand TLS ???
> > > Modify KSE to understand TLS ???
> >
> > Yes, I'm sure I and/or David can support this.
> >
> > > Modify THR to understand TLS ???
> > > Modify C_R to understand TLS ???
> >
> > Death to C_R, death to C_R, ...
> >
>
> What happens when the compiler, toolchain, etc, etc, are all updated to
> make TLS work, but the user libmaps C_R in? Does stuff blow up? I'm ok
> with C_R not explicitely supporting it so long as it doesn't create new
> failure cases.
I guess stuff blows up, probably very similar to what already
happens when someone tries to use nvidia drivers/openGL with
libpthread or libthr. But as far as I know, nothing we have
is currently built to use it (it probably can't be because
our released toolchain first needs to support it).
--
Dan Eischen
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.10.10403240130160.1570-100000>