Doug Rabson wrote: > On Mon, 2004-06-07 at 16:33, Scott Long wrote: > >>Doug Rabson wrote: >> >>>On Sunday 06 June 2004 20:55, Daniel Eischen wrote: >>> >>> >>>>On Sun, 6 Jun 2004, Scott Long wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>All, >>>>> >>>>>We are about 4-6 weeks away from starting the 5.3 release cycle. >>>>>As it stands, KSE still only works reliably on i386. There are >>>>>reports of significant instability on amd64, and it doesn't work at >>>>>all on alpha and sparc64. I'm willing to drop the alpha >>>>>requirement and maybe even the sparc64 requirement, but there >>>>>absolutely will not be a 5.3 until amd64 is solid. Please contact >>>>>myself, Dan Eischen, and David Xu if you are interested in helping >>>>>out. >>>> >>>>amd64 looks to be a problem in readline which doesn't seem >>>>to redispatch signal handlers with SA_SIGINFO arguments. >>>> >>>>David also has patches for debugging support at: >>>> >>>> http://people.freebsd.org/~davidxu/kse/dbg/ >>>> >>>>Doug Rabson also has basic TLS support working in perforce. >>>>It'd be nice to get TLS and debugging in before 5.3-release. >>> >>> >>>I'll probably try to commit some kind of TLS support into current in the >>>next couple of weeks. Its likely to only support i386 and will be >>>stubbed out for other platforms. Right now, I'm just waiting for some >>>kind of feedback from an nvidia developer whos testing it. >> >>I'm happy to see that it's gotten this far along, but it needs to be >>available on all tier-1 platforms when it goes in. For the sake of >>argument, we'll call that amd64 and possibly sparc64. My understanding >>is that amd64 should be very similar to i386, yes? Please let me know >>what kind of help you need with getting this done. > > > Well I'm not so sure that it does need to be supported on all tier 1 > platforms. If a given tier 1 platform has a TLS-capable toolchain then > sure - its only about a hundred lines of code to add support once the > toolchain support is there. Currently our toolchain only supports TLS on > i386 and ia64. I think that a binutils upgrade might fix amd64 but the > rest need a new compiler. > > Right now, there is only one real application which absolutely needs TLS > and that is the NVidia OpenGL driver on i386. It looks like the DRM > people will start using TLS at some point but they aren't using it now. > If we reach 5.3 without any new toolchain support for TLS, I think we > should ship with TLS support on only i386 and ia64. It seems silly to > not support TLS on i386 (which people are begging for) because we can't > do it on sparc64 (which no-one needs). > > I agree completely. I forgot to stress in the previous mail that there is a strong push at the moment to get in gcc34 and binutils 2.15(?), which should make TLS infrastructure available to amd64 and sparc64. I don't think that sparc64 should be a hard requirement, but it should at least be looked at and documented so that someone else can come along and do the work. ScottReceived on Mon Jun 07 2004 - 14:00:42 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:56 UTC