From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:37230)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1QtkBj-0000X2-Bx
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 17 Aug 2011 13:46:04 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1QtkBd-0005Go-Td
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 17 Aug 2011 13:45:58 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:8273)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1QtkBd-0005GV-MS
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 17 Aug 2011 13:45:53 -0400
Message-ID: <4E4BFE4D.2080706@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2011 10:45:49 -0700
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1313520667-26507-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>
	<CAJSP0QW-e6Vbm2uVTSccd7WHZDU2RsD0gzduOiFmM__1AWO3fQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E4BF6D6.5040801@redhat.com>
	<CAJSP0QUj2R9WpzDJRFU-Zv25CbH9Qzk1H_=8RNQQeanT5-K+RQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E4BFA29.7010703@redhat.com>
	<CAAu8pHsc1wrJa3rn+QWd1SD9c0ofYY0_BN9KFvKoU+JTKvikMA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAu8pHsc1wrJa3rn+QWd1SD9c0ofYY0_BN9KFvKoU+JTKvikMA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qemu-thread: add TLS wrappers
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>
Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On 08/17/2011 10:37 AM, Blue Swirl wrote:
> >  I would agree (just did it for fun and to see how it looks like), but
> >  perhaps we can do something similar to what Windows does for OpenBSD too.
> >
> >  Though I'm quite disappointed and I must say OpenBSD should enter the 21st
> >  century.
>
> I can't justify their design decisions, but isn't __thread a
> non-standard extension by GCC anyway whereas POSIX threads are the
> standard? Are other compilers supporting it?

Visual C++ supports __declspec(thread).

pthread TLS is orders of magnitudes slower than __thread.  __thread in 
an executable is just as fast as a non-TLS variable access, 2 or 3 
machine language instructions at most.

Some pthread_getspecific implementation do a _linear walk_ of the keys. 
  In that case it may work to have something like Windows plus a single 
pthread_getspecific key.  On the other hand, Windows provides very good 
support for that thanks to its ordered subsections (.tls$something).  It 
only needs a bit of preprocessor magic.  Thinks such as linker scripts 
would be way out of scope.

Paolo