On 12/22/2016 10:21 AM, Andrey Semashev wrote:
...
The idea is that the stack-based allocator is used in a signal handler. The stacktrace created in that context cannot escape the signal handler and can be used e.g. to save the backtrace to a file.
I hate to sound like a broken record but every time I read "to a file" I get concerned as it does not seem to fit our deployment case. Airline scheduling and disruption management. There are people on call 24/7 to address the situations when our s/w crashes. The operators have no issues/difficulties with the logs and, in fact, they send us those automatically without asking. It is really a stretch expecting them to find, handle, copy files or to run an extra application. Probably doable but I am not convinced. So, retrieving such a file from their secured system will be a royal pain. I might have missed that but dumping the textual stack-trace to the log is still on the cards, right?
The static storage fits that use case as well, although care must be taken to avoid concurrency issues. Perhaps, a thread-specific static storage would be an even better alternative.
Yes, thread_local certainly seems in order... Although I am under impression that POSIX signals are delivered to only one thread and, when that happens, the other threads are stopped. If so, then no need for thread_local... But I am admittedly hazy on handling signals in MT environment.