RFC: TLS improvements for IA32 and AMD64/EM64T

[Alexandre Oliva]

On Sep 16, 2005, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@novell.com> wrote:

>> Please check the current x86-64 ABI, the relocations until 31 are all
>> taken and reserved, you cannot use the above ones,

> It's actually 33 meanwhile. And the same proposal that adds 32 and 33
> to x86-64 also suggests using 38 on i386 for a different purpose. See
> the thread starting at
> http://www.x86-64.org/mailing_lists/list?listname=discuss&listnum=0

Thanks, I've renumbered the relocations to avoid conflicts and, while
at that, the dynamic table entries to a more appropriate range.

Here's a patch for the x86-64 ABI document that adds the new
relocations and references the new dynamic table numbers, referring to
the latest version of my specs on the web for details.

I'll post updated patches for binutils and glibc as soon as I get
confirmation that the 3 relocation numbers are at least reserved for
this purpose.

Thanks,

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: tlsdesc.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 3126 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/attachments/20050916/41c04037/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------

-- 
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}