Re: [PATCH] Avoid depending on destructor order

[David Edelsohn <dje.gcc@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2084 bytes --]

On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 10:12 AM Thomas Neumann <neumann@in.tum.de> wrote:

> >
> >     +static const bool in_shutdown = false;
> >
> > I'll let Jason or others decide if this is the right solution.  It seems
> > that in_shutdown also could be declared outside the #ifdef and
> > initialized as "false".
>
> sure, either is fine. Moving it outside the #ifdef wastes one byte in
> the executable (while the compiler can eliminate the const), but it does
> not really matter.
>
> I have verified that the patch below fixes builds for both fast-path and
> non-fast-path builds. But if you prefer I will move the in_shutdown
> definition instead.
>
> Best
>
> Thomas
>
> PS: in_shutdown is an int here instead of a bool because non-fast-path
> builds do not include stdbool. Not a good reason, of course, but I
> wanted to keep the patch minimal and it makes no difference in practice.
>
>
>      When using the atomic fast path deregistering can fail during
>      program shutdown if the lookup structures are already destroyed.
>      The assert in __deregister_frame_info_bases takes that into
>      account. In the non-fast-path case however is not aware of
>      program shutdown, which caused a compiler error on such platforms.
>      We fix that by introducing a constant for in_shutdown in
>      non-fast-path builds.
>
>      libgcc/ChangeLog:
>              * unwind-dw2-fde.c: Introduce a constant for in_shutdown
>              for the non-fast-path case.
>
> diff --git a/libgcc/unwind-dw2-fde.c b/libgcc/unwind-dw2-fde.c
> index d237179f4ea..0bcd5061d76 100644
> --- a/libgcc/unwind-dw2-fde.c
> +++ b/libgcc/unwind-dw2-fde.c
> @@ -67,6 +67,8 @@ static void
>   init_object (struct object *ob);
>
>   #else
> +/* Without fast path frame deregistration must always succeed.  */
> +static const int in_shutdown = 0;
>
>   /* The unseen_objects list contains objects that have been registered
>      but not yet categorized in any way.  The seen_objects list has had
>

Thanks for the patch.  I'll let you and Jason decide which style solution
is preferred.

Thanks, David