HA: [lld] r254428 - [ELF] - Refactor of tls_index implementation for tls local dynamic model.

[George Rimar via llvm-commits]

>On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 2:01 AM, George Rimar <grimar at accesssoftek.com> wrote:
>>>addLocalModuleTlsIndex was the correct name. It is the TLS Index
>>>object for the local module.
>>>
>>>- Michael Spencer
>>
>> Ok. My point was not about it is incorrect, but to make it a bit close to specs.
>> Urlich has next description "to generate a tls index entry for symbol x1 this code uses x1 at tlsld(%rip) which creates a special kind of index which refers to the current module" so
>> module is called as "current" there. At the same time he talks about Local Dynamic TLS Model. "local model" is used often in whole spec, but "module" is always "current" I think.
>> So for me addLocalModelTlsIndex is a little closer to what spec uses.
>>
>> George.
>
>addLocalModelTlsIndex is wrong. It is adding a tls_index entry for the
>module being linked, not for the "local model". There are also
>tls_index entries created which may not refer to the module being
>linked. I'm fine with the name addCurrentModuleTlsIndex, but
>addLocalModelTlsIndex is wrong, and "local model" is never used in the
>spec.
>
>- Michael Spencer

"Local Dynamic TLS Model" is used everywhere there. "local model" is just a short form of it, that what I meant in method name: index created in context of that model.
Lets stop on addCurrentModuleTlsIndex() then if we are both fine with that.

George.