http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54129
--- Comment #6 from blucia at gmail dot com 2012-07-30 21:00:56 UTC ---
Thanks for pointing out where that code is.
I still think this is weird (i.e., possibly a bug) for two reasons:
1)Differs from Linux behavior. I'm sure lots of things differ
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54129
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski 2012-07-30
20:50:21 UTC ---
>Where is the code in the destructor for the __thread variables?
in libgcc/emutls.c .
The code is:
static void
emutls_destroy (void *ptr)
{
struct __emutls_array *arr = ptr;
poi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54129
--- Comment #4 from blucia at gmail dot com 2012-07-30 20:40:31 UTC ---
I don't really see your point. Where is the code in the destructor for the
__thread variables? For the pthread_key_create vars, I wrote down what I want
to do to the data, an
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54129
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski 2012-07-30
20:29:05 UTC ---
> In my program, only one destructor function exists.
Yes in your source only has one but the code really there is two. One for the
__thread implementation and one you have in your
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54129
--- Comment #2 from blucia at gmail dot com 2012-07-30 20:25:52 UTC ---
The man page for pthread_key_create says:
"An optional destructor function may be associated with each key value. ...
The order of destructor calls is unspecified if more th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54129
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |middle-end
Summary|__thread va
