| To: | Anoop <acv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: whether ext() and atexit() are safe w.r.t each other |
| From: | Eric Blake <ebb9@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 06 Jun 2008 06:22:01 -0600 |
| Cc: | austin-group-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| References: | <48491601.7030306@linux.vnet.ibm.com> |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 According to Anoop on 6/6/2008 4:48 AM: | Being more specific, if a thread is registering a handler using atexit() | while | exit() is processing the already registered handlers in the main thread, | what is the expected behavior as per the standard? The standard is clear (and requires the same as C99): "At normal program termination, all functions registered by the atexit() function shall be called, in the reverse order of their registration, except that a function is called after any previously registered functions that had already been called at the time it was registered." So if an additional atexit() function is registered during exit() processing, that newly-registered handler will be the next handler executed when the current handler completes. - -- Don't work too hard, make some time for fun as well! Eric Blake ebb9@byu.net -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin) Comment: Public key at home.comcast.net/~ericblake/eblake.gpg Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkhJK+kACgkQ84KuGfSFAYDyBACgi2bUOOVhuJVsqP1UStJv4oFv td0AmwbzjgXp59cxACepMTBHCFH7MniE =2D/D -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | whether ext() and atexit() are safe w.r.t each other, Anoop |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | sigaction and sigaltstack - is detecting stack overflow possible?, Eric Blake |
| Previous by Thread: | whether ext() and atexit() are safe w.r.t each other, Anoop |
| Next by Thread: | sigaction and sigaltstack - is detecting stack overflow possible?, Eric Blake |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [All Lists] |