[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGxPR-9y8-dkjzOJf-6OFP65jwH30L1TAa-OxNO1uUcbHGp-FQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 23:52:46 +0200
From: Bartosz Brachaczek <b.brachaczek@...il.com>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] cleanup/refactor pthread_arch.h, pthread_impl.h
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 6:43 PM Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote:
> The attached patch series refactors fragments from pthread_arch.h to
> reduce redundancy and allow pthread_arch.h to be included at the top
> of pthread_impl.h, where it can be used to influence the
> definition/layout of struct __pthread, rather than the middle of the
> file. This makes it possible to get rid of the duplicate canary and
> dtv members that existed just to match multiple ABIs silumtaneously.
>
> This involved a good deal of manual conversion/deduplication so it's
> possible there are bugs for some archs. That's why I've posted the
> series for review rather than just pushing. Reports of success/failure
> (disassembly of pthread_self.o before/after probably suffice to
> confirm no regression) would be very helpful.
>
I mechanically confirmed for all archs that with the first two patches
applied, disassembly of pthread_self.o before/after doesn't change. The
third patch obviously changes the offset for most archs due to change in
sizeof struct pthread.
Only other remark: ricv64's __get_tp misses the change of the variable type
from char * to uintptr_t.
Content of type "text/html" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
