When I replaced the std::unique_ptr member in r16-997-gef632273a90657 I
should have added an explicit delete[] operation to replace the effects
of the unique_ptr destructor.
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
PR libstdc++/123378
* include/std/barrier (~__tree_barrier_base): Define.
---
Tested x86_64-linux.
libstdc++-v3/include/std/barrier | 6 ++++++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/include/std/barrier b/libstdc++-v3/include/std/barrier
index 060285d6bf85..0986ff9dada6 100644
--- a/libstdc++-v3/include/std/barrier
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/std/barrier
@@ -114,6 +114,12 @@ It looks different from literature pseudocode for two main
reasons:
_M_state.store(_M_alloc_state().release(), memory_order_release);
}
+ ~__tree_barrier_base()
+ { delete[] _M_state.load(memory_order_relaxed); }
+
+ __tree_barrier_base(const __tree_barrier_base&&) = delete;
+ __tree_barrier_base& operator=(const __tree_barrier_base&&) = delete;
+
unique_ptr<__state_t[]>
_M_alloc_state()
{
--
2.52.0
