public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "nathan at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/99456] [11 regression] ABI breakage with some static initialization
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2021 12:47:09 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-99456-4-zBRbir1qV5@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-99456-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99456

--- Comment #4 from Nathan Sidwell <nathan at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
It's an ABI issue, because all compilers must agree on which parts of an inline
object are dynamically initialized.  (gcc-11 does not agree with gcc-10).

consider:

inline Type Var = Expr;

That'll be emitted as comdat in every TU that needs it.  Assume some of those
TUs generate a static init and others generate a dynamic init.  Let's say it's
a dynamic one that gets into the executable, but one of the static TUs accesses
Var before that dyn init has run.  Boom, zero-initialized entity observed.

Or, let's say a static one wins, but then a dynmic initializer runs
concurrently to a (static TU's) access.  Oops, we could observe (weird) partial
writes.  (this would require Var to be a function-scope static because global
inits run in a single-thread environment, and it's less likelu to be a
problem).

In case it's not clear, this example shows both the above happening, and poor
code generation with (a) unused inline vars emitting code and (b) guard
variables for inline vars with no dynamic init.

Hope that helps.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-03-08 12:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-03-07 20:50 [Bug c++/99456] New: " nathan at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-07 20:51 ` [Bug c++/99456] " nathan at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-07 20:51 ` nathan at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-07 21:01 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-08  9:56 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-08 11:34 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-08 12:47 ` nathan at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2021-03-08 13:21 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-08 13:30 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-08 13:32 ` nathan at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-08 13:39 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-08 14:03 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-08 14:21 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-08 15:48 ` nathan at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-09 10:12 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-09 11:05 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-19 17:38 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-19 17:38 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-03-22  2:09 ` unlvsur at live dot com

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-99456-4-zBRbir1qV5@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: link
Be 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).