On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 11:00:22PM +, Jay wrote:
>
>Is it the source code making the function calls that bothers you,
>or the code size/perf bloat?
>
> If it is the source, just hide it with macros, like:
>
> #define foo /* existing thread local stuff */
> #define bar /* existing thread local
[ Your messages would be a lot easier to read without the random
schizophrenic line length and indentation. ]
Jay wrote:
> I meant implementing __thread in gcc.
Starting in 4.3 gcc supports emutls, which enables __thread support on
all threaded targets, even when there is no actual TLS support
Is it the source code making the function calls that bothers you,
or the code size/perf bloat?
If it is the source, just hide it with macros, like:
#define foo /* existing thread local stuff */
#define bar /* existing thread local stuff */
typedef struct cygwin_threadlocals_t {
int
Is it the source code making the function calls that bothers you,
or the code size/perf bloat?
If it is the source, just hide it with macros, like:
#define foo /* existing thread local stuff */
#define bar /* existing thread local stuff */
typedef struct cygwin_threadlocals_t {
int
On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 07:31:01AM +, Jay wrote:
>
> >[jay] harder to port to other architectures,
>> [cgf] Cygwin works on all of the architectures that Windows NT+ supports.
>
>
> I mean really doing a native AMD64 and/or IA64 port, not just relying
> on the ability to run 32bit x86 code. I
(reformatted)
On Tue, September 2, 2008 12:42 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Jay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> snipped the drivel
> ...
>
>> The code seems very wierd in places.
>> I don't "like" it.
>> I know, boo hoo, whine whine whine. It seems to work but it makes me
>> nervous. - Jay
> J
Jay,
rather than making silly pedantic and empty arguments I'd rather that you
contributed to making things better. That is if you were truely up to it
capable.
regards
Jay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
snipped the drivel
...
> The code seems very wierd in places.
> I don't "like" it
>[jay] harder to port to other architectures,
> [cgf] Cygwin works on all of the architectures that Windows NT+ supports.
I mean really doing a native AMD64 and/or IA64 port, not just relying
on the ability to run 32bit x86 code. Imho, that's cheating.
> [jay] Why does Cygwin do such wie
On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 08:33:16AM +, Jay wrote:
> Why does Cygwin do such wierd stuff with the top of the stack?
> Is this to have thread locals faster than TlsGetValue offers?
No, it is a work-around for this:
% cat <<'EOF' > foo.c
__thread int abc;
int
main (int argc, char **argv)
Why does Cygwin do such wierd stuff with the top of the stack?
Is this to have thread locals faster than TlsGetValue offers?
Is it worth it?
(The cost: harder to LoadLibrary(cygwin1.dll), harder to port to other
architectures,
the strange path where DllMain "respawns", etc.)
- Jay
--
U
10 matches
Mail list logo
