[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Draft TLS/NPTL ABI for m68k and ColdFire, version 0.2



On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 10:08:53AM +0000, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Apr 2008, Stephen R Marenka wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 07:05:05PM +0000, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> > > CodeSourcery has been investigating implementing TLS (Thread-Local
> > > Storage) and NPTL (Native POSIX Thread Library) for ColdFire
> > > processors.  The proposed TLS ABI for ColdFire and m68k, including the
> > > required kernel interfaces, is below; any comments?
> > 
> > Out of curiosity, has any progress been made? I think we're going to
> > need to update glibc rather soonish and it would be nice to have TLS 
> > and NTPL, otherwise it's going to get ugly.
> 
> <http://lists.debian.org/debian-68k/2008/02/msg00212.html> and 
> <http://lists.debian.org/debian-68k/2008/03/msg00008.html> still apply: we 
> expect the implementations to be complete, validated and contributed some 
> time this year.  (Note that the binutils multi-GOT patch, a prerequisite 
> for the binutils TLS work because both involve major changes to the same 
> areas in BFD, has been posted to the binutils list and revised in response 
> to reviewer comments.  The plan is for the binutils TLS support to be 
> developed based on FSF binutils HEAD once the multi-GOT support is there - 
> so the multi-GOT patch is in that way progress towards TLS (and of course 
> there will be multi-GOT support for the new TLS relocations).)  Based on 
> previous experience implementing TLS and NPTL for other targets, I expect 
> them to be ready for the end of Stage 2 for GCC 4.4 development (August by 
> current plans), but even if the GCC patch isn't ready then to go in FSF 
> GCC 4.4 I expect we'll still post it as soon as it's ready to make it 
> available for inclusion in distributor versions of 4.4 and backporting to 
> older compiler versions if desired.

Thanks for the update. :)

-- 
Stephen R. Marenka     If life's not fun, you're not doing it right!
<stephen@marenka.net>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: