Remove static variable #841
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
rdaly525
approved these changes
Feb 12, 2020
|
That's weird...wonder if it https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6714046/c-linux-double-destruction-of-static-variable-linking-symbols-overlap get's at the heart of it, i.e. it's linked statically and dynamically simultaneously somewhere |
|
@rsetaluri That's my theory, particularly because CoreIR is combining a statically link libcoreir with dynamically loaded libraries like commonlib |
|
Ill keep the branch around for now in case anyone is still using it |
Merged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This fixes StanfordAHA/garnet#428
I'm not exactly sure what the issue is, but I suspect it's related to the fact that a static member is being used in static linking context. Using gdb backtrace lead me to this as the source of the double free, and changing it to use normal non-static logic resolves the issue, although we should probably update all the passes to use the same form (I'm not sure why it only happens with this one, and/or whether it will resolve the issue for others).