On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Martin Sebor <mse...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 03/02/2017 01:08 AM, Richard Biener wrote: >> >> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 2:01 AM, Joseph Myers <jos...@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
