[PATCH] Async signal safe TLS accesses

[Joseph S. Myers]

On Wed, 2 Oct 2013, Carlos O'Donell wrote:

> I'm pretty sure that we have consensus that the public API will
> need to be done as a follow-on patch to the original support for
> TLS in signal handlers.

I don't think there's a consensus that there should be such a public API 
for signal-safe allocation at all.

I do think there is consensus for allowing TLS access in signal handlers.  
I'd like there to be consensus for TLS accesses never failing (i.e. all 
dynamic allocation being done at thread creation time or dlopen time, when 
it's possible to return an error status, and initial accesses doing no 
more than associating a variable with memory from a pool where a 
sufficient amount of memory is guaranteed to have been allocated at one of 
those times), but while I don't think anyone has objected to that, I'm not 
sure enough people have actually thought about it.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com