HEADS UP! KSE needs more attention
marcel at xcllnt.net
Mon Jun 7 23:10:21 GMT 2004
On Mon, Jun 07, 2004 at 10:42:13PM +0100, Doug Rabson wrote:
> On Monday 07 June 2004 20:42, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 07, 2004 at 05:22:35PM +0100, Doug Rabson wrote:
> > > > > Actually its a bit better than that. It works for most use
> > > > > cases right now on i386 but would get confused on dlclose. I'll
> > > > > fix that before I move it into current.
> > > >
> > > > Does it work on static bound executables?
> > >
> > > Which one is static bound
> > The executable; you know, no rtld. What I call complete executable to
> > distinguish it from static TLS on my page. Does static TLS work?
> > See also: http://wiki.daemon.li/index.pl?ThreadLocalStorage
> No, this one is not yet supported. I think I can deal with this inside
> libc with some small support from the kernel (probably just to provide
> details of the TLS segment size etc.)
Ok, thanks. BTW, I was thinking along the same lines, although it
looks from your description that I probably wanted to put more of
the meat in the kernel to avoid making the startup code complex
and possibly pessimizing non-TLS processes.
Anyway: From my PoV, static TLS is not critical enough to force it
in 5.3, but it is important enough to have soon after that.
Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel at xcllnt.net
More information about the freebsd-current