https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112351
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112351
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7562f089a190953b8ef615b90b7b0520e812a930
commit r14-5220-g7562f089a190953b8ef615b90b7b0520e812a930
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112351
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Ah yes, that's a good point. Patrick's improvement affects this initialization.
It's not done for all targets though, as not all targets have linker support
for the init_priority attribute (notably, darwi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112351
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
The question is also how much of explicit thread safety is needed when the init
is now happening inside libstdc++ (thus from _init which should be already
ensured to execute exactly once)? Is that (_init t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112351
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
