thread-local-storage

问题 int i; int main() { return i; } After -static compile readelf -l shows program headers from elf: Elf file type is EXEC (Executable file) Entry point 0xxxxx30 There are 6 program headers, starting at offset 52 Program Headers: Type Offset VirtAddr PhysAddr FileSiz MemSiz Flg Align LOAD 0x000000 0x08048000 0x08048000 0x79868 0x79868 R E 0x1000 > LOAD 0x079f94 0x080c2f94 0x080c2f94 0x0078c 0x02254 RW 0x1000 << NOTE 0x0000f4 0x080480f4 0x080480f4 0x00020 0x00020 R 0x4 > TLS 0x079f94 0x080c2f94

问题 This question already has answers here : Closed 7 years ago . Possible Duplicate: C++11 thread_local in gcc - alternatives Is there any way to fully emulate thread_local using GCC's __thread? I wanted to use the c++11 thread_local to create and use thread_local variable but as it is not yet supported by gcc, I am using gcc specific __thread . The way I declared the variable is myClass { public: static __thread int64_t m_minInt; }; __thread int64_t myClass::m_minInt = 100; When I compile it, I

问题 This question already has answers here : Closed 7 years ago . Possible Duplicate: C++11 thread_local in gcc - alternatives Is there any way to fully emulate thread_local using GCC's __thread? I wanted to use the c++11 thread_local to create and use thread_local variable but as it is not yet supported by gcc, I am using gcc specific __thread . The way I declared the variable is myClass { public: static __thread int64_t m_minInt; }; __thread int64_t myClass::m_minInt = 100; When I compile it, I

问题 This question already has answers here : Closed 7 years ago . Possible Duplicate: C++11 thread_local in gcc - alternatives Is there any way to fully emulate thread_local using GCC's __thread? I wanted to use the c++11 thread_local to create and use thread_local variable but as it is not yet supported by gcc, I am using gcc specific __thread . The way I declared the variable is myClass { public: static __thread int64_t m_minInt; }; __thread int64_t myClass::m_minInt = 100; When I compile it, I

问题 Valgrind is reporting leaked blocks, apparently one per thread, in the following code: #include <iostream> #include <thread> #include <mutex> #include <list> #include <chrono> std::mutex cout_mutex; struct Foo { Foo() { std::lock_guard<std::mutex> lock( cout_mutex ); std::cout << __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ << '\n'; } ~Foo() { std::lock_guard<std::mutex> lock( cout_mutex ); std::cout << __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ << '\n'; } void hello_world() { std::lock_guard<std::mutex> lock( cout_mutex ); std::cout << _

问题 This code: #include <iostream> #include <thread> #include <mutex> struct Singl{ Singl(Singl const&) = delete; Singl(Singl&&) = delete; inline static thread_local bool alive = true; Singl(){ std::cout << "Singl() " << std::this_thread::get_id() << std::endl; } ~Singl(){ std::cout << "~Singl() " << std::this_thread::get_id() << std::endl; alive = false; } }; static auto& singl(){ static thread_local Singl i; return i; } struct URef{ ~URef(){ const bool alive = singl().alive; std::cout << alive

问题 I am confused with the description of thread_local in C++11. My understanding is, each thread has unique copy of local variables in a function. The global/static variables can be accessed by all the threads (possibly synchronized access using locks). And the thread_local variables are visible to all the threads but can only modified by the thread for which they are defined? Is it correct? 回答1: Thread-local storage duration is a term used to refer to data that is seemingly global or static

问题 I'm dealing with some C++ code that has an optimised version that uses inline assembly. The optimised version is exhibiting behaviour that is not thread safe, which can be traced to 3 global variables that are accessed extensively from inside the assembly. __attribute__ ((aligned (16))) unsigned int SHAVITE_MESS[16]; __attribute__ ((aligned (16))) thread_local unsigned char SHAVITE_PTXT[8*4]; __attribute__ ((aligned (16))) unsigned int SHAVITE_CNTS[4] = {0,0,0,0}; ... asm ("movaps xmm0,

问题 /* We are using Aspect to do AOP on some existing application and we also used threadlocal to store GUId. we are using @Around annotation. At the start of the transaction we are setting the GUID in transaction with initialValue() method. Issue is as we know when we are using threadlocal we should also take care about removing the data from threadlocal otherwise it may result i outofmemory execption. if i am removing it at the last of the aspect it is corrupting the code and changing the UUID

问题 Given native code (C/C++), could someone explain thread local storage? Is it simply a trick that allows threads to control the lifetime of their own variables, or is there some isolation/protection enforcement by either the compiler or the hardware? Does the underling platform matter? Further more, what is the difference between plain TLS and "Fiber-safe" TLS, with respect to the above? Sorry, I googled, but all I could find was how to use TLS (which I already know) but not the geeky details