From: Andrew Pinski <pinskia@gmail.com>
To: Martin Sebor <msebor@gmail.com>
Cc: Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>,
Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>,
Gcc Patch List <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] free MPFR caches in gimple-ssa-sprintf.c (PR 79699)
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2017 21:40:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+=Sn1mZfBgJO6d=xMQxkP=anPPJ+dsB65qzHe9Y+uonVYTpmw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <63968707-1824-0aa5-c03d-939cdb14aba5@gmail.com>
On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Martin Sebor <msebor@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 03/02/2017 01:08 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 2:01 AM, Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, 1 Mar 2017, Martin Sebor wrote:
>>>
>>>> Joseph, since you commented on the bug, do you have a suggestion
>>>> for a different site for it or a guard? The only other call to
>>>> the function is in the Fortran FE and it's neither guarded nor
>>>> does it appear to ever be called.
>>>
>>>
>>> I don't think a guard is needed. Arguably it should be called from an
>>> atexit handler, but since we don't have such a handler calling it from
>>> the
>>> relevant pass seems reasonable (and I'm not sure what the right way to
>>> handle such freeing of memory in the JIT context is).
>>
>>
>> IMHO we should call it from gcc::~context
>
>
> Thanks, that makes sense to me. The attached patch does that.
Is this function call thread safe? Or rather is MPFR thread safe?
I am thinking of the case where there are two gcc::context around one
running in each thread. I am not saying this is the current behavior
but I do know there was talk about making GCC thread safe before and I
want to make sure we understand that this might cause issues in that
goal.
Thanks,
Andrew
>
> Martin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-02 21:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-01 23:32 Martin Sebor
2017-03-02 1:01 ` Joseph Myers
2017-03-02 8:08 ` Richard Biener
2017-03-02 21:34 ` Martin Sebor
2017-03-02 21:40 ` Andrew Pinski [this message]
2017-03-02 21:56 ` Martin Sebor
2017-03-03 11:02 ` Richard Biener
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='CA+=Sn1mZfBgJO6d=xMQxkP=anPPJ+dsB65qzHe9Y+uonVYTpmw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=pinskia@gmail.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=joseph@codesourcery.com \
--cc=msebor@gmail.com \
--cc=richard.guenther@gmail.com \
/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).