| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
|
|
wasm64 build with target-feature=+simd128,+atomics
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/126778
|
|
|
|
As discovered by Mara in #110897, our TLS implementation is a total mess. In the past months, I have simplified the actual macros and their expansions, but the majority of the complexity comes from the platform-specific support code needed to create keys and register destructors. In keeping with #117276, I have therefore moved all of the `thread_local_key`/`thread_local_dtor` modules to the `thread_local` module in `sys` and merged them into a new structure, so that future porters of `std` can simply mix-and-match the existing code instead of having to copy the same (bad) implementation everywhere. The new structure should become obvious when looking at `sys/thread_local/mod.rs`.
Unfortunately, the documentation changes associated with the refactoring have made this PR rather large. That said, this contains no functional changes except for two small ones:
* the key-based destructor fallback now, by virtue of sharing the implementation used by macOS and others, stores its list in a `#[thread_local]` static instead of in the key, eliminating one indirection layer and drastically simplifying its code.
* I've switched over ZKVM (tier 3) to use the same implementation as WebAssembly, as the implementation was just a way worse version of that
Please let me know if I can make this easier to review! I know these large PRs aren't optimal, but I couldn't think of any good intermediate steps.
@rustbot label +A-thread-locals
|
|
Prevent copy-paste errors from producing new starved-for-resources
threaded platforms by raising `DEFAULT_MIN_STACK_SIZE` from 4096 bytes
to at least 64KiB.
Two platforms "affected" by this have no actual threads:
- UEFI
- "unsupported"
Platforms that this actually affects:
- wasm32-wasi with "atomics" enabled
- wasm32-wasi-p1-threads
Two exceptions:
- SGX: a "secure code execution" platform, stays at 4096B
- TEEOS: also a "secure code execution" platform, stays at 8192B
I believe either of these may have sufficiently "interesting" semantics
around threads, or significant external library support. Either would
mean making any choices here for them is suspect.
|
|
|
|
This reverts #121666 due to #123495
|
|
SeqCst is unnecessary. Release+Acquire is the right ordering for a
mutex.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
