Skip to content

TSRM: Replace TSRM_TLS by C11’s thread_local #20062

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

TSRM: Replace TSRM_TLS by C11’s thread_local #20062

wants to merge 2 commits into from
+33 −19

Conversation

TimWolla
Copy link
Member

@TimWolla TimWolla commented Oct 4, 2025

No description provided.

@TimWolla TimWolla requested a review from arnaud-lb October 4, 2025 17:20
@TimWolla TimWolla requested a review from dstogov as a code owner October 4, 2025 17:20
@TimWolla
Copy link
Member Author

TimWolla commented Oct 4, 2025

Appears to be blocked on #20064.

nielsdos
nielsdos reviewed Oct 4, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@nielsdos nielsdos left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This duplicates some code regarding the includes, so I don't particularly like this. Imo it adds more complexity

dstogov
dstogov reviewed Oct 6, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@dstogov dstogov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wouldn't do this. I would prefer to keep TSRM as an abstraction layer.

@TimWolla
Copy link
Member Author

TimWolla commented Oct 8, 2025

@nielsdos The duplication arises from the TLS testing files that Arnaud added for static OPcache. Other than that the change remains localized to TSRM.

@dstogov TSRM still remains an abstraction layer for most of the thread-safety support. But it seems useful to me to rely on standardized functionality where possible.

A good think that this PR pointed out: We were apparently not yet building with C11 on Windows. It makes sense to me to ship that independently. Unfortunately my attempt to change that failed, due to ext/intl which needs C++. I'm not seeing how to easily add the /std: flag for everything when not overridden. And I also don't have any Windows experience (or even a Windows machine available). Perhaps @cmb69 can provide some insight?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@dstogov dstogov dstogov left review comments

@nielsdos nielsdos nielsdos left review comments

@arnaud-lb arnaud-lb Awaiting requested review from arnaud-lb

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
ABI break Category: Build System Category: Engine Extension: opcache
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@TimWolla @dstogov @nielsdos