public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug libstdc++/109889] [13/14 Regression] Segfault in __run_exit_handlers since r13-5309-gc3c6c307792026 Date: Wed, 17 May 2023 11:26:05 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-109889-4-dt18uktb8l@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-109889-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109889 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> --- I wonder if we have a static destructor ordering problem. The libstdc++ test code uses a local static std::map, which will be constructed on first use and destroyed on exit. When built with -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG that is a __gnu_debug::map which uses checked iterators, so keeps a list of all constructed iterators. On destruction that map locks a mutex, which is another local static, and . Since r13-6282-gd70f49e98245f8 the mutexes are created in a char buffer and never destroyed: // Use a static buffer, so that the mutexes are not destructed // before potential users (or at all) static __attribute__ ((aligned(__alignof__(M)))) char buffer[(sizeof (M)) * (mask + 1)]; static M *m = new (buffer) M[mask + 1]; return m[i]; But something could be wrong with lifetimes of those statics, causing an invalid 'this' pointer to be used somewhere.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-17 11:26 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2023-05-17 11:10 [Bug libstdc++/109889] New: " redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-17 11:17 ` [Bug libstdc++/109889] " redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-17 11:25 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-17 11:26 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2023-05-17 11:30 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-17 15:04 ` tuliom at ascii dot art.br 2023-05-17 15:10 ` tuliom at ascii dot art.br 2023-05-17 15:50 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-17 15:57 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-17 15:58 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-17 15:59 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-17 19:38 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-19 12:49 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-05-24 12:04 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-07-27 9:26 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-05-21 9:15 ` [Bug libstdc++/109889] [13/14/15 " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-109889-4-dt18uktb8l@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).