Re:0+0 > 0: C++ thread-local storage performance
by yosefk on Tuesday February 18, 2025 @01:12AM
(#43086578)
In what sense should reading the TID be cheap? You would need either a syscall (not cheap) or thread-local storage (the subject of TFA.) Avoiding the use of TLS by reading the TID can't really work
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:0+0 > 0: C++ thread-local storage performance
by HALtheWise on Tuesday February 18, 2025 @02:17AM
(#43086884)
It looks like the TID is stored directly in the pthread struct pointed to by %fs itself, at a fixed offset which you can somewhat-hackily compile into your code. [0]
In the process of investigating this, I also realized that there's a ton of other unique-per-thread pointers accessible from that structure, most notably including the value of %fs itself (which is unfortunately unobservable afaict), the address of the TCB or TLS structures, the stack guard value, etc. Since the goal is just to have a quickly-readable unique-per-thread value, any of those should work.
Windows looks similar, but I haven't investigated as deeply.
[0] https://github.com/andikleen/glibc/blob/b0399147730d478ae451...
[1] https://github.com/andikleen/glibc/blob/b0399147730d478ae451...