This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] Fix quick_exit to match C++11 specification.
- From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com>
- To: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval dot zanella at linaro dot org>
- Cc: Johan Karlsson <johan dot karlsson at enea dot com>
- Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2016 03:50:38 -0400
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix quick_exit to match C++11 specification.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <5751B292 dot 40109 at redhat dot com> <383b6001-e2ef-635a-4240-aa7fba826de3 at redhat dot com> <57525107 dot 5060500 at redhat dot com> <1c6e298e-ae7c-7e7a-d271-dfb75e874a04 at redhat dot com> <575613DA dot 3070209 at redhat dot com> <99119374-6dc7-42c2-451c-b4be759b7cc2 at redhat dot com>
On 06/07/2016 02:18 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> I don't quite follow.
>> It is the call to exit, _Exit/_exit, or quick_exit which decides
>> the sequence of process termination actions.
> Well yes, in your implementation of the compat symbol. But it doesn't
> has to be this way, and it may not be the âcorrectâ approach.
>> Particularly in C++ the quick_exit call must not run destructors
>> for thread local objects, since the standard mandates that.
>> Changing __cxa_thread_atexit_impl would be more complicated than
>> just changing quick_exit.
> I put âcorrectâ in scare quotes because I'm not convinced that we'd
> need a compat symbol at all for this (but if we do, it probably
> should be put on the registration, storing a flag along with callback
> registration data).
What do we gain by this?