Displaying 6 results from an estimated 6 matches for "localdynam".
Did you mean:
localdynamic
2012 Jun 23
2
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [Patch, RFC] Re: Adding support for explicitly specified TLS models (PR9788)
...ptimizers have to play with. For example, documenting the possibility
of having a small amount of initial-exec in a dso that is dlopend
would be a bad idea, as it would prevent the compiler from lowering a
variable to initial-exec as that might go over the limit.
Something high level like:
> * localdynamic: Only used from this DSO.
> * initialexec: Will not be loaded dynamically.
> * localexec: Will be in the executable and is only used from it.
is probably OK.
>> + default: // Map unknown non-zero value to default.
>>
>> Why?
>
> Lots of other functions in the fi...
2012 Jun 21
2
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [Patch, RFC] Re: Adding support for explicitly specified TLS models (PR9788)
...> variables are created based on old ones.
The rest of the review:
+ separated copy of the variable). Optionally, a suggested TLS model may be
Not sure I would call it "suggested". What it is is a promise by the
FE/user that some restrictions apply to how the variable is used:
* localdynamic: Only used from this DSO.
* initialexec: Will not be loaded dynamically.
* localexec: Will be in the executable and is only used from it.
The restrictions should be documented too.
+ bool isThreadLocal() const { return threadLocalMode; }
Add a != NotThreadLocal to make it explicit.
+ defau...
2012 Jun 22
0
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [Patch, RFC] Re: Adding support for explicitly specified TLS models (PR9788)
...'s go with GeneralDynamicTLSModel then.
> + separated copy of the variable). Optionally, a suggested TLS model may be
>
> Not sure I would call it "suggested". What it is is a promise by the
> FE/user that some restrictions apply to how the variable is used:
>
> * localdynamic: Only used from this DSO.
> * initialexec: Will not be loaded dynamically.
> * localexec: Will be in the executable and is only used from it.
>
> The restrictions should be documented too.
I'm not sure how much detail we should go into here, because the
restrictions might vary de...
2012 Jun 23
0
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [Patch, RFC] Re: Adding support for explicitly specified TLS models (PR9788)
...example, documenting the possibility
> of having a small amount of initial-exec in a dso that is dlopend
> would be a bad idea, as it would prevent the compiler from lowering a
> variable to initial-exec as that might go over the limit.
>
> Something high level like:
>
>> * localdynamic: Only used from this DSO.
>> * initialexec: Will not be loaded dynamically.
>> * localexec: Will be in the executable and is only used from it.
>
> is probably OK.
I've put that in the doc. We can tweak it more after commit if necessary.
>>> And this return is dea...
2012 Jun 21
0
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [Patch, RFC] Re: Adding support for explicitly specified TLS models (PR9788)
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 9:29 PM, Rafael Espíndola
<rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Attaching a new patch that has the behaviour we discussed.
>>
>> The "globaldynamic" and default values have been merged, and LLVM will
>> start off with the user-specified model, but choose a more specific
>> one if possible.
>>
>> Please review.
2012 Jun 20
2
[LLVMdev] [llvm-commits] [Patch, RFC] Re: Adding support for explicitly specified TLS models (PR9788)
> Attaching a new patch that has the behaviour we discussed.
>
> The "globaldynamic" and default values have been merged, and LLVM will
> start off with the user-specified model, but choose a more specific
> one if possible.
>
> Please review.
Awesome, thanks!
I will try to do a more complete review tonight or tomorrow. For now,
just two quick observations
*) This