On 27/09/14 08:56, Andrew Haley wrote:
> I may be guilty of missing a crucial point here, but: why do we care
> about having a small limit of static TLS variables?
>
> We surely could allocate, say, a megabyte of static TLS for each
> thread. We already allocate 64M for the thread-local malloc ar
I may be guilty of missing a crucial point here, but: why do we care
about having a small limit of static TLS variables?
We surely could allocate, say, a megabyte of static TLS for each
thread. We already allocate 64M for the thread-local malloc arena,
after all. It doesn't cost anything beyond
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 04:17:14AM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > I was building libreoffice with profile feedback and I run into a message
> >
> > cannot load any more object with static TLS
> >
> > that took me a while to track as I did not see where static TLS is comming
> > out.
> > Ian poi
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 04:17:14AM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> I was building libreoffice with profile feedback and I run into a message
>
> cannot load any more object with static TLS
>
> that took me a while to track as I did not see where static TLS is comming
> out.
> Ian pointed out to me t
On 2014.09.26 at 04:50 +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> What is the earlierst binutils release fixing the bug? I will add it into
> changes.html for 5.0.
binutils-2.24
--
Markus
> > Thank you! Now when I have your attention, perhaps we could discuss the
> > original
> > motivation of the change that exposed this bug.
> > I was building libreoffice with profile feedback and I run into a message
> >
> > cannot load any more object with static TLS
> >
> > that took me a whil
> Thank you! Now when I have your attention, perhaps we could discuss the
> original
> motivation of the change that exposed this bug.
> I was building libreoffice with profile feedback and I run into a message
>
> cannot load any more object with static TLS
>
> that took me a while to track as I
> The plugin API doesn't have a way to mark a symbol as TLS, but it
> doesn't really matter since the linker simply overrides the
> placeholder from the claimed file with the symbol provided in the
> replacement. Unfortunately, I excluded common symbols from this logic
> in gold, so the symbol isn'
The plugin API doesn't have a way to mark a symbol as TLS, but it
doesn't really matter since the linker simply overrides the
placeholder from the claimed file with the symbol provided in the
replacement. Unfortunately, I excluded common symbols from this logic
in gold, so the symbol isn't getting
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 8:37 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 8:24 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> >> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 6:58 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> >>>
> >>>b: 00 00
> >>> 9: R_X86_64_TPOFF32
> >>> __gcov_indirect_call_counters_ltopriv
> >
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 8:37 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 8:24 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 6:58 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>>>
>>>b: 00 00
>>> 9: R_X86_64_TPOFF32
>>> __gcov_indirect_call_counters_ltopriv
>>
>> Look at the
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 6:58 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> >
> >b: 00 00
> > 9: R_X86_64_TPOFF32
> > __gcov_indirect_call_counters_ltopriv
>
> Look at the .o file where __gcov_indirect_call_counters_ltopriv is
> defined. That .o file must have the symbol marked as
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 8:24 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 6:58 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>>
>>b: 00 00
>> 9: R_X86_64_TPOFF32
>> __gcov_indirect_call_counters_ltopriv
>
> Look at the .o file where __gcov_indirect_call_counters_ltopriv is
>
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 6:58 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>
>b: 00 00
> 9: R_X86_64_TPOFF32
> __gcov_indirect_call_counters_ltopriv
Look at the .o file where __gcov_indirect_call_counters_ltopriv is
defined. That .o file must have the symbol marked as STT_TLS and it
>
> I'm not sure because my line numbers don't match. If it is this
> assert:
>
> case elfcpp::R_X86_64_TPOFF32: // Local-exec
> if (tls_segment == NULL)
> {
> gold_assert(parameters->errors()->error_count() > 0
> || issue_undefined_symbol_err
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 11:18 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>> On 2014.09.20 at 05:16 +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> > libreoffice fails to build with TLS because of "Cannot load any more object
>> > with static TLS". Iant pointed out to me the difference that the initial
>> > exec
>> > TLS model
On 2014.09.24 at 20:18 +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > On 2014.09.20 at 05:16 +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > libreoffice fails to build with TLS because of "Cannot load any more
> > > object
> > > with static TLS". Iant pointed out to me the difference that the initial
> > > exec
> > > T
> On 2014.09.20 at 05:16 +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > Hi,
> > libreoffice fails to build with TLS because of "Cannot load any more object
> > with static TLS". Iant pointed out to me the difference that the initial
> > exec
> > TLS model is also used by static TLS variables.
> >
> > This patch p
On 2014.09.20 at 05:16 +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> Hi,
> libreoffice fails to build with TLS because of "Cannot load any more object
> with static TLS". Iant pointed out to me the difference that the initial exec
> TLS model is also used by static TLS variables.
>
> This patch prevents turning TLS
19 matches
Mail list logo
