Re: svn commit: r339898 - head/lib/libc/amd64/sys

2018-11-04 Thread Julian Elischer
what's an ifunc? ___ freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-toolchain To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-toolchain-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: GCC withdraw

2013-08-30 Thread Julian Elischer
On 8/30/13 1:02 AM, David Chisnall wrote: On 29 Aug 2013, at 15:57, John Baldwin wrote: I have not seen any convincing argument as to why leaving GCC in the base for 10.x impedes anything. Because clang isn't sufficient for so many non-x86 platforms we can't really start using clang-specifi

Re: GCC withdraw

2013-08-24 Thread Julian Elischer
On 8/24/13 7:19 PM, David Chisnall wrote: On 24 Aug 2013, at 11:30, "Sam Fourman Jr." wrote: So I vote, let's not give ourselves the burden of "lugging" dead weight in base for another 5 years. (in 2017 do we still want to be worrying about gcc in base?) Perhaps more to the point, in 2017 do

Re: GCC withdraw

2013-08-23 Thread Julian Elischer
On 8/23/13 7:55 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: In message <52174d51.2050...@digsys.bg>, Daniel Kalchev writes: - 9.x gcc default and clang in base; - 10.x clang default and gcc in ports; I believe this is the best idea so far. As long as these ports work with gcc in ports, that is. +1 well as

Re: patch to add AES intrinsics to gcc

2013-08-23 Thread Julian Elischer
On 8/23/13 8:26 PM, Andriy Gapon wrote: on 23/08/2013 14:06 David Chisnall said the following: Our gcc is from 2007. It has no C11, no C++11 support. It has bugs in its atomic generation so you can't use it sensibly without lots of inline assembly (which it doesn't support for newer architectu

Re: patch to add AES intrinsics to gcc

2013-08-23 Thread Julian Elischer
On 8/23/13 6:35 PM, David Chisnall wrote: On 23 Aug 2013, at 10:58, Bernhard Fröhlich wrote: I don't know if you are aware that IF you really do that we will have serious problems to ship packages for 10. USE_GCC=any is the fallback in the portstree for all ports that are unable to build with

Re: Fast sigblock (AKA rtld speedup)

2013-01-12 Thread Julian Elischer
On 1/11/13 9:31 PM, Konstantin Belousov wrote: On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 12:29:06AM +0100, Jilles Tjoelker wrote: On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 10:49:38PM +0200, Konstantin Belousov wrote: http://people.freebsd.org/~kib/misc/rtld-sigblock.3.patch The new fields td_sigblock_ptr and td_sigblock_val are

Re: Fast sigblock (AKA rtld speedup)

2013-01-07 Thread Julian Elischer
On 1/7/13 10:22 AM, Konstantin Belousov wrote: Below is the forward of the patch for which I failed to obtain a private review. Might be, the list generates more responses. Our rtld has a performance bootleneck, typically exposed by the images with the lot of the run-time relocation processing,

Re: LLVM Image Activator

2013-01-07 Thread Julian Elischer
On 1/6/13 10:02 AM, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: Having LLVM/clang in the base system lets us do some interesting things that we couldn't do with GCC. One is that LLVM ships with a JIT for LLVM IR as well as components of a toolchain for it (this is what Google's pNACL uses) and that you can end up pr