Re: RFC: TLS improvements for IA32 and AMD64/EM64T

[Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>]

On Sep 19, 2005, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 10:38:10AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Sep 17, 2005, Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com> wrote:
>> 
>> > On Sat, Sep 17, 2005 at 02:25:49PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> >> Err...  Mainly because that would make it easier for people (including
>> >> myself) to experiment with it.  Get it tested by early birds by
>> >> including it disabled by default, and then eventually switch to it as
>> >> the default, perhaps as early as 4.2.
>> 
>> > Eh...  I think this should wait until after the branch.
>> 
>> My turn to ask why :-)

> Sorry, Alexandre, this is not a new port, it's new functionality.

Which is exactly why I was asking for an exception to get it in.
Heck, if it was accepted, I was even going to back-port it to 4.0,
since I felt that was useful.

The reason I pressed for reasons was because I thought there might be
other concerns, that I might be willing to clear up.  If that's not
the case, and there's not going to be an exception for a small, simple
patch that has no effect unless an option is given, and that offers
big performance improvements if it's enabled, I'll just wait for 4.2.

But I really think it would be nice if it could make to 4.1, such that
say GNU/Linux distros based on GCC 4.1 could take advantage of it
without having to introduce the patch themselves.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva         http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}