[oe] [RFC] Adding TLS selection choice to metadata

[Holger Hans Peter Freyther]

On Wednesday 29 July 2009 09:02:39 Khem Raj wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 9:14 PM, Holger Hans Peter
>
> Freyther<holger+oe at freyther.de> wrote:
> > On Tuesday 28 July 2009 09:22:02 Khem Raj wrote:
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> Enabling TLS support on uclibc/glibc is not sound enough in out build.
> >> Reason is we depend upon various autotools tests to find out if the
> >> software combination we chose can support it or not and these tests are
> >> not doing the correct think many times.
> >
> > Have you seen the patch I sent? The title was
> > [oe] [PATCH] gcc: Pass --enable-tls=no on uclibc builds...
>
> I did however nptl/uclibc builds we need TLS support to be enabled
> and there is no way to differentiate the triplets for a NPTL uclibc
> toolchain from non NPTL toolchain. In future not all arches will get
> NPTL support
> on uclibc at once so we wil have few arches where NPTL will be there and
> that will require TLS whereas others will use Linux Threads and will
> have to disable TLS.

To cite my patch:

+# The tls/ntpl support in uclibc is work in progress. For the current
+# targets we should build gcc with --enable-tls=no. In the future we
+# might want to enable TLS for certain architectures and uclibc versions
+# so this is why this method exists.
+def get_gcc_uclibc_tls_setting(bb, d):
+    return "--enable-tls=no"


we are basically talking about the same thing? e.g. with the proposed 
TARGET_TLS you would add a if to the above and return "". right?

z.