On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 3:31 PM Dmitry Vyukov <dvyu...@google.com> wrote: > Since I already looked at the code, if init and uninit can be called > concurrently, I think there is a prominent race condition between init > and uninit: a concurrent uninit can run concurrnetly with the next > init and this will totally mess things up.
Good point; fixed. Though this doesn't have any effect on the issue here. :)
