From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/2058
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Daniel_Cegie=B3ka?= <daniel.cegielka@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general
Subject: Re: TLS (thread-local storage) support
Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2012 10:17:19 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPLrYEQ94jJOpOJGti-bJ1GpqFgvoz0d-0vB2Z6A1HesyhZT4g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20121004211332.GA12874@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <CAPLrYER3rUhbuuc1aYkq1JJmyLjvUvCir0Cp=GJqEHVzyx=v=Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <20121004223631.GL254@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1349511474 24131 80.91.229.3 (6 Oct 2012 08:17:54 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2012 08:17:54 +0000 (UTC)
To: musl@lists.openwall.com
Original-X-From: musl-return-2059-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Sat Oct 06 10:18:01 2012
Return-path: <musl-return-2059-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com>
Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org
Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200])
	by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <musl-return-2059-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com>)
	id 1TKPaA-00073r-TW
	for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2012 10:17:59 +0200
Original-Received: (qmail 32676 invoked by uid 550); 6 Oct 2012 08:17:52 -0000
Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:musl@lists.openwall.com>
List-Help: <mailto:musl-help@lists.openwall.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:musl-unsubscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:musl-subscribe@lists.openwall.com>
Original-Received: (qmail 32668 invoked from network); 6 Oct 2012 08:17:51 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=7pI6OfzVou7GyJnh4F7MJX51jHY+DxxOg9CTYquADew=;
        b=tGgRDeHlJ4KuWE4nfBRKbO0aVXibGDfnFv3vJeGl/H+mH2slctYsyz65kfFjfLffLK
         KxeyDxyqa1kiJQvzAN0lNleAQuyUGSKZ8L1QOAv2kBcxobKlp7TXEGXNy+PxHA1E7cbd
         4busiR7bScaEi23Fkljy0OnoQWWiACZVuGwliVZC5Uv5eM9GY2uFlmEZ4uz2+uOuyKri
         e+Z6xM+lPUgFnO34PFqkmspub1d7cjsuQDXsjUeutMVSlDomhWX8mK2/GMymGZQ8hykH
         vz951NCs7MZHhDr8ukWWUnVA9DTYKFU//hoMdRfrbfcp9MJ/D9hZO4DMVWF57wTvHiWP
         ssXA==
In-Reply-To: <20121004223631.GL254@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:2058
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/2058>

2012/10/5 Rich Felker <dalias@aerifal.cx>:
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 11:29:11PM +0200, Daniel Cegie=C5=82ka wrote:
>> great news! Finally able to compile Go (lang)...
>
> Did Go fail with gcc's emulated TLS in libgcc?

I tested Go with sabotage (with fresh musl). I'll try to do it again...
gcc in sabotage was compiled without support for TLS, so I didn't
expect that it will be successful:

https://github.com/rofl0r/sabotage/blob/master/pkg/gcc4

> My impression is that
> it should usually/always work, but it's just very slow and
> low-quality (lazy allocation). This isn't gcc's fault, just the fact
> that it's impossible to emulate correctly. On the other hand, Go might
> be generating code that accesses TLS directly, in which case the
> emulation may not suffice.
>
> BTW, does Go work with static linking? If not, you might need to wait
> to celebrate until I add the dynamic-linked TLS support...

https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=3D#!topic/golang-nuts/N5QCFkXon=
0M

Daniel

> Rich