From: mengqinggang <mengqinggang@loongson.cn>
To: Tatsuyuki Ishi <ishitatsuyuki@gmail.com>
Cc: binutils@sourceware.org, Lulu Cai <cailulu@loongson.cn>,
chenglulu@loongson.cn, hejinyang@loongson.cn,
i.swmail@xen0n.name, liuzhensong@loongson.cn,
luweining@loongson.cn, Fangrui Song <maskray@google.com>,
nickc@redhat.com, wanglei@loongson.cn, xry111@xry111.site,
xuchenghua@loongson.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH] LoongArch: Do not add DF_STATIC_TLS for TLS LE
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2024 16:27:10 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <97672660-4314-0526-ccf6-5ddfbddbf891@loongson.cn> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <FF105E3C-46DD-49A6-A660-5B20DA6ACE49@gmail.com>
Thank you very much, I will apply this patch soon.
For the last patch, I think we can add new comments while retaining the
original ones.
The original comments describe another implementation method and can be
compared with the existing ones.
If I wants to allocate GOT entry separately for IE/GD in the future, I
can refer to these comments.
在 2024/1/22 下午1:45, Tatsuyuki Ishi 写道:
>> On Dec 28, 2023, at 23:58, Tatsuyuki Ishi <ishitatsuyuki@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> TLS LE is exclusively for executables, while DF_STATIC_TLS is for DLLs.
>> DF_STATIC_TLS should only be set for TLS IE (and when it's DLL), not LE.
>> ---
>> bfd/elfnn-loongarch.c | 2 --
>> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/bfd/elfnn-loongarch.c b/bfd/elfnn-loongarch.c
>> index bd448cda453..64c34e99261 100644
>> --- a/bfd/elfnn-loongarch.c
>> +++ b/bfd/elfnn-loongarch.c
>> @@ -862,8 +862,6 @@ loongarch_elf_check_relocs (bfd *abfd, struct bfd_link_info *info,
>> if (!bfd_link_executable (info))
>> return false;
>>
>> - info->flags |= DF_STATIC_TLS;
>> -
>> if (!loongarch_elf_record_tls_and_got_reference (abfd, info, h,
>> r_symndx,
>> GOT_TLS_LE))
>> --
>> 2.40.1
>>
>>
> Any interest in reviewing / merging this and the other two patches sent together?
> The DF_STATIC_TLS change is pretty short, the formatting patch is trivial.
> As for the last patch introducing a comment change, I’m not sure what Mengqing’s stance is, but my intention for the comment change is to provide a better context for the reader rather than comparing to a solution that is not currently implemented in the codebase.
>
> Tatsuyuki.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-22 8:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-12-28 14:58 Tatsuyuki Ishi
2023-12-28 14:58 ` [PATCH] LoongArch: Use tab to indent assembly in TLSDESC test suite Tatsuyuki Ishi
2024-01-22 9:47 ` mengqinggang
2023-12-28 14:58 ` [PATCH] LoongArch: Update comment about bottom bit usage in TLS GOT construction Tatsuyuki Ishi
2023-12-29 8:50 ` mengqinggang
2023-12-29 9:11 ` Tatsuyuki Ishi
2023-12-29 9:59 ` mengqinggang
2024-01-22 5:45 ` [PATCH] LoongArch: Do not add DF_STATIC_TLS for TLS LE Tatsuyuki Ishi
2024-01-22 5:48 ` Fangrui Song
2024-01-22 6:51 ` Xi Ruoyao
2024-01-22 7:11 ` Fangrui Song
2024-01-22 8:27 ` mengqinggang [this message]
2024-01-22 9:46 ` mengqinggang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=97672660-4314-0526-ccf6-5ddfbddbf891@loongson.cn \
--to=mengqinggang@loongson.cn \
--cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
--cc=cailulu@loongson.cn \
--cc=chenglulu@loongson.cn \
--cc=hejinyang@loongson.cn \
--cc=i.swmail@xen0n.name \
--cc=ishitatsuyuki@gmail.com \
--cc=liuzhensong@loongson.cn \
--cc=luweining@loongson.cn \
--cc=maskray@google.com \
--cc=nickc@redhat.com \
--cc=wanglei@loongson.cn \
--cc=xry111@xry111.site \
--cc=xuchenghua@loongson.cn \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).