Austin Group Defect Tracker

Aardvark Mark IV


Viewing Issue Simple Details Jump to Notes ] Issue History ] Print ]
ID Category Severity Type Date Submitted Last Update
0000733 [1003.1(2013)/Issue7+TC1] Base Definitions and Headers Editorial Clarification Requested 2013-08-12 12:35 2019-06-10 08:55
Reporter steffen View Status public  
Assigned To
Priority normal Resolution Accepted As Marked  
Status Closed  
Name Steffen Nurpmeso
Organization
User Reference
Section
Page Number 331, 493, 546, 1951
Line Number 11054, 16840, 18989-90, 62637
Interp Status ---
Final Accepted Text Note: 0001719
Summary 0000733: Volatile qualification of sig_atomic_t is ambigiuous
Description The standard is ambigiuous on wether the sig_atomic_t typedef includes the `volatile' qualifier or not.

Whereas p. 331 l. 11054 says it is "Possibly volatile-qualified integer type", and p. 546 l. 18989-90 state "Integer type of an object that can be accessed as an atomic entity, even in the presence of asynchronous interrupts.") further references (p. 493, l. 16840; p. 1951 l. 62637) enforce the user to provide the qualifier explicitly.

Because the type is async-safe by definition the `volatile' qualifier must necessarily be part of the typedef if such a qualification is necessary to enforce the necessary constraints.
Note this issue is related to issue 728.
Desired Action On page 493, line 16840, change

  assigning a value to an object declared as volatile sig_atomic_t,

to

  assigning a value to an object declared as sig_atomic_t,

On page 1951, line 62637, change

  assigning a value to an object declared as volatile sig_atomic_t,

to

  assigning a value to an object declared as sig_atomic_t,
Tags tc2-2008
Attached Files

- Relationships
related to 0000728Applied Restrictions on signal handlers are both excessive and insufficient 

-  Notes
(0001719)
geoffclare (manager)
2013-08-15 16:00

At page 546 line 18989 section 2.12.1 in the description of sig_atomic_t change:

    Integer type

to

    Possibly volatile-qualified integer type
(0001720)
nick (manager)
2013-08-15 16:11
edited on: 2013-08-15 16:13

C99 and C11 say that the implementation can choose whether to make sig_atomic_t a typedef of a volatile- or non-volatile-qualified integer type, but where the standard explicitly uses volatile as a qualifier we require it to be volatile. Thus, the "possibly" when discussing the definition of the type does not conflict with the need to declare 'volatile sig_atomic_t'.


- Issue History
Date Modified Username Field Change
2013-08-12 12:35 steffen New Issue
2013-08-12 12:35 steffen Name => Steffen Nurpmeso
2013-08-12 12:35 steffen Page Number => 331, 493, 546, 1951
2013-08-12 12:35 steffen Line Number => 11054, 16840, 18989-90, 62637
2013-08-15 15:36 eblake Relationship added related to 0000728
2013-08-15 16:00 geoffclare Note Added: 0001719
2013-08-15 16:02 geoffclare Interp Status => ---
2013-08-15 16:02 geoffclare Final Accepted Text => Note: 0001719
2013-08-15 16:02 geoffclare Status New => Resolved
2013-08-15 16:02 geoffclare Resolution Open => Accepted As Marked
2013-08-15 16:02 geoffclare Tag Attached: tc2-2008
2013-08-15 16:11 nick Note Added: 0001720
2013-08-15 16:13 nick Note Edited: 0001720
2013-08-15 16:13 eblake Note Edited: 0001720
2013-08-15 16:13 nick Note Edited: 0001720
2019-06-10 08:55 agadmin Status Resolved => Closed


Mantis 1.1.6[^]
Copyright © 2000 - 2008 Mantis Group
Powered by Mantis Bugtracker