Il 18/02/2014 11:05, Markus Armbruster ha scritto:
> Yes, SIGABRT is synchronous for all purposes. So the only danger is
> that g_string_free() or g_free() could fail while we're in
> g_assert(false). But they don't, which makes sense because they are
> totally unrelated to g_assert() and therefore can handle re-entrancy.
The (theoretical!) problem is when it aborts in the bowels of g_*free(),
and your SIGABRT handler reenters g_*free().
> In practice there is no issue and I've tested assertion failure with
> glib 1.2.10.
Worst that can happen is we crash on the way from abort() to process
termination. Tolerable.
What about recursive locking of a non-recursive mutex?
Paolo
