rename open_issues.mdwn to service_solahart_jakarta_selatan__082122541663.mdwn

2 files changed, 0 insertions, 236 deletions

diff --git a/open_issues/glibc/t/tls-threadvar.mdwn b/open_issues/glibc/t/tls-threadvar.mdwn
deleted file mode 100644
index 40d1463e..00000000
--- a/open_issues/glibc/t/tls-threadvar.mdwn
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,155 +0,0 @@
-[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2011, 2012, 2013 Free Software Foundation,
-Inc."]]
-
-[[!meta license="""[[!toggle id="license" text="GFDL 1.2+"]][[!toggleable
-id="license" text="Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this
-document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or
-any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant
-Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts.  A copy of the license
-is included in the section entitled [[GNU Free Documentation
-License|/fdl]]."]]"""]]
-
-[[!tag open_issue_glibc open_issue_libpthread]]
-
-This basically means to get rid of `sysdeps/mach/hurd/bits/libc-tsd.h` (and
-thus the `_HURD_THREADVAR_*`/`_hurd_threadvar_location` interface), and
-directly use `__thread` instead.
-
-[[!toc]]
-
-
-# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-10-23
-
-    <tschwinge> youpi: If we want to replace threadvars with TLS, there is one
-      problem: the threadvars interface is publically exported:
-      /usr/include/hurd/threadvar.h.
-    <tschwinge> youpi: But I am somewhat inclined to say that the only user of
-      this is libthreads/libpthread.  Do you think differently?
-    <youpi> tschwinge: that's very probable
-    <youpi> so I think we can just drop it
-    <youpi> (people should use TLS anyway)
-
-[[libpthread_set_stack_size]].
-
-After this has been done, probably the whole `__libc_tsd_*` stuff can be
-dropped altogether, and `__thread` directly be used in glibc.
-
-
-# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-08-07
-
-    <tschwinge> r5219: Update libpthread patch to replace threadvar with tls
-      for pthread_self
-    <tschwinge> r5224: revert r5219 too, it's not ready either
-    <youpi> as the changelog says, the __thread revertal is because it posed
-      problems
-    <youpi> and I just didn't have any time to check them while the freeze was
-      so close
-    <tschwinge> OK.  What kind of problems?  Should it be reverted upstream,
-      too?
-    <youpi> I don't remember exactly
-    <youpi> it should just be fixed
-    <youpi> we can revert it upstream, but it'd be good that we manage to
-      progress, at some point...
-    <tschwinge> Of course -- however as long as we don't know what kind of
-      problem, it is a bit difficult.  ;-)
-    <youpi> since I didn't left a note, it was most probably a mere glibc run,
-      or boot with the patched libpthread
-    <youpi> *testsuite run
-    <tschwinge> OK.
-    <tschwinge> The libpthread testsuite doesn't show any issues with that
-      patch applied, though.  But I didn'T test anything else.
-    <tschwinge> youpi: Also, you have probably seen my glibc __thread errno
-      email -- rmcgrath wanted to find some time this week to comment/help, and
-      I take it you don't have any immediate comments to that issue?
-    <youpi> I saw the mails, but didn't investigate at all
-
-[[!message-id "878vdyqht3.fsf@kepler.schwinge.homeip.net"]].
-
-
-# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2013-07-08
-
-    <youpi> tschwinge: apparently there were a lot of changes missing in the
-      threadvars branch I had commited long time ago
-    <youpi> I'm gathering things
-    <tschwinge> youpi: t/tls-threadvar you mean?
-    <youpi> yes
-    <youpi> tschwinge: yes, there were a lot other occurences of threadvars
-      stuff in various places
-    <youpi> I'm building libc again, and will see what issue would remain
-
-
-## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2013-07-12
-
-    <youpi> braunr: about the per-thread ports, there is also the mig reply
-      port
-    <youpi> (stored in _HURD_THREADVAR_MIG_REPLY)
-
-
-## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2013-07-15
-
-    <braunr> and with the branch youpi pushed where he removes threadvars, it
-      shouldn't get "too" hard
-    <braunr> (save for the tricky bugs you may encounter)
-    <youpi> well, that branch is not working yet
-
-
-## IRC, OFTC, #debian-hurd, 2013-09-22
-
-    <youpi> I'm currently tracking bugs with my threadvars changes
-    <youpi> some of them seem fine, others, not
-    <youpi> of course the most complex ones are the most probable culprits for
-      the issues I'm getting
-    <youpi> fortunately they're after the process bootstrap
-    <youpi> so basically that works
-    <youpi> just a few dozen tests fail
-    <youpi> mostly about loading .so  or raising signals
-    <youpi> dlopen("bug-dlsym1-lib1.so"): bug-dlsym1-lib1.so: cannot open
-      shared object file: Function not implemented
-    <youpi> after having changed errno a bit
-    <youpi> doesn't that look odd ? :)
-    <youpi> good, I found an issue with the sigstate
-    <youpi> now running testsuite again, to see whether there are other issues
-      with it :)
-    <youpi> s/sigstate/reply_port/ actually
-
-
-## IRC, OFTC, #debian-hurd, 2013-09-23
-
-    <youpi> yay, errno threadvar conversion success
-
-
-## IRC, OFTC, #debian-hurd, 2013-10-05
-
-    <gg0_> youpi: any ETA for tls?
-    <youpi> gg0_: one can't have an ETA for bugfixing
-    <gg0_> i don't call them bugs if there's something missing to implement btw
-    <youpi> no, here it's bugs
-    <youpi> the implementation is already in the glibc branches in our
-      repository
-    <youpi> it just makes some important regressions
-
-
-## IRC, OFTC, #debian-hurd, 2013-10-07
-
-    <youpi> about tls, I've made some "progress": now I'm wondering how raise()
-      has ever been working before :)
-
-
-## IRC, OFTC, #debian-hurd, 2013-10-15
-
-    <youpi> good, reply_port tls  is now ok
-    <youpi> last but not least, sigstate
-
-
-## IRC, OFTC, #debian-hurd, 2013-10-21
-
-    <youpi> started testsuite with threadvars dropped completely
-    <youpi> so far so good
-
-
-## IRC, OFTC, #debian-hurd, 2013-10-24
-
-    <youpi> ok, hurd boots with full-tls libc, no threadvars at all any more
-    <gg0> \o/
-    <gg0> good bye threadvars bugs, welcome tls ones ;)
-    <youpi> now I need to check that threads can really use another stack :)
diff --git a/open_issues/glibc/t/tls.mdwn b/open_issues/glibc/t/tls.mdwn
deleted file mode 100644
index b10703fd..00000000
--- a/open_issues/glibc/t/tls.mdwn
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,81 +0,0 @@
-[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2011, 2012, 2013 Free Software Foundation,
-Inc."]]
-
-[[!meta license="""[[!toggle id="license" text="GFDL 1.2+"]][[!toggleable
-id="license" text="Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this
-document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or
-any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant
-Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts.  A copy of the license
-is included in the section entitled [[GNU Free Documentation
-License|/fdl]]."]]"""]]
-
-[[!tag open_issue_glibc open_issue_libpthread]]
-
-# To Do
-
-  * Discuss d2431f633e6139a62e1575ec18830f7e81160cf0 with Samuel.
-
-  * Validate our implementation against
-    <https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/TLSandSignals>.
-
-
-# Documentation
-
-[[!taglink open_issue_documentation]]
-
-  * IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-11-26
-
-        <tschwinge> In glibc multiarch support (strcasecmp for i686 SSE3, etc.)
-          there is access to memory via gs: -- this will need to be changed for
-          us, right?
-        <youpi> depends on the access
-        <tschwinge>       * `optimized strcasecmp and strncasecmp for x86-32`
-          (multiarch),
-        <tschwinge>         76e3966e9efc3808a9e7ad09121c5dfc1211c20b +
-        <tschwinge>         6abf346582ba678f4850a88b4a5950593841df1d +
-        <tschwinge>         5583a0862cf94f71cbcde91c4043a20af65facca.  `gs`
-          access.
-        <youpi> +       movl    __libc_tsd_LOCALE@GOTNTPOFF(%ebx), %eax
-        <youpi> that's handled by the linker fine
-        <youpi> it's only the things held in the tcb_t structure which can pose
-          problem
-        <tschwinge> tcbhead_t?
-        <tschwinge> I'm looking at this.
-        <tschwinge> So, at gs:0, there is the TCB.
-        <tschwinge> And we have the same layout as NPTL/Linux, just that we
-          don't have as much data there as they have.
-        <tschwinge> We're missing multiple_threads, sysinfo, sttack_guard,
-          pointer_guard, gscope_flag, private_futex, __private_tm[5].
-        <tschwinge> So, if one of these is referenced (be it my name or by
-          numeric offset), this is invalid for us.
-        <tschwinge> Anything else should work equivalently.
-        <youpi> yes
-        <youpi> usually the only numeric offset being used is 0
-        <youpi> so it would simply not build
-        <tschwinge> And the other offsers are generated via tcb-offsets.sym.
-        <tschwinge> glibc's elf/stackguard-macros.h is wrong for us (but not
-          used anywhere apart from elf/tst-stackguard1.c, I think).
-
-After commit a9538892adfbb9f092e0bb14ff3a1703973968af, it's
-`sysdeps/i386/stackguard-macros.h`; problem remains.
-
-        <tschwinge> __thread __locale_t __libc_tsd_LOCALE = &_nl_global_locale;
-          -- this means that a __libc_tsd_LOCALE values will be in the TLS
-          segment, and this is what is being accessed from the assembler code
-          with %gs:__libc_tsd_LOCALE@NTPOFF, and the linker will resolve this.
-        <youpi> yes
-        <youpi> see in the nm output, the libc_tsd symbols
-        <youpi> these provide the offsets
-        <tschwinge> youpi: Thank you, I'm now understanding this part of TLS
-          much better.
-        <youpi> have you had a look at the tls.pdf from Uli ?
-        <youpi> all the gory details are there :)
-
-Commit c61b4d41c9647a54a329aa021341c0eb032b793e, [[!sourceware_PR 15754]], adds
-`sysdeps/i386/stackguard-macros.h:POINTER_CHK_GUARD`, which is not correct for
-us (at the moment), but it also shouldn't cause any harm, as this file is only
-used in `elf/tst-ptrguard1.c` and `elf/tst-stackguard1.c`, which now will fail
-to build for us, as we don't have a `pointer_guard` member in
-`sysdeps/mach/hurd/tls.h:tcbhead_t`.
-
-We don't define `THREAD_SET_POINTER_GUARD`.