[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Tinycc-devel] Feature request: _Thread_local (and a possible bug)
From: |
Thomas Preud'homme |
Subject: |
Re: [Tinycc-devel] Feature request: _Thread_local (and a possible bug) |
Date: |
Sun, 03 Nov 2013 23:34:50 +0800 |
User-agent: |
KMail/4.10.5 (Linux/2.6.38-ac2-ac100; KDE/4.10.5; armv7l; ; ) |
Le jeudi 31 octobre 2013 16:17:00 Thomas Preud'homme a écrit :
> Le mercredi 30 octobre 2013 19:40:10 Robert Clausecker a écrit :
> > I see nothing in the patch you made that indicates any special access
> > conventions to thread-local variables (such as %fs-relative
> > instructions). It might very well be possible that I missed that, but I
> > can't test because tcc does not compile the code at all on my machine.
>
> Right, it just handles the syntax and the ELF part. I'll improve the patch.
Well, I was way too optimist as to the complexity of TLS. After reading the
document from Ulrich Drepper on TLS and a few search on google I realized that
at least the following are missing :
- segment register not select in load and store
- no relocation added for computing offset of per-thread symbol
- no support for TLS-specific relocations (link-time and run-time)
- no program header added as per Drepper document about TLS
I also need to think about what part of the dynamic machinery are needed for
tcc -run and what part will be taken care of by ld.so. That answer might be
obvious but it's getting late for me and I haven't given it much thought.
Since it's going to take some time to implement, I'll give the priority to
other long work I had put aside such as ARM calling convention refactoring (+
add comments) and returning of struct in registers. In other words, TLS is not
going to happen soon.
Best regards,
Thomas
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] Feature request: _Thread_local (and a possible bug),
Thomas Preud'homme <=