Re: glibc mutex deadlock in signal handler

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> Perhaps we should reconsider whether f4c3edc (vreportf: avoid
> intermediate buffer, 2015-08-11) is a good idea.  Note that snprintf is
> not on the list of safe functions, but I imagine that in practice it is
> fine. Though just avoiding error()/warning() in signal handlers might be
> a more practical solution anyway.

I had exactly the same thought when I read the initial report here.

I wish we can just do "if (in_signal) return;" at the beginning of
vreportf(), but we would not want a global variable there, so... ;-)

Further, I briefly hoped that avoiding error/warning in the signal
handler codepath would allow us to be more lax around allocations,
but I suspect that it unfortunately would not help us that much, as
we may be calling these functions in low memory situations.

So let's queue Takashi's patch as-is for now and look at other
signal codepaths.

Thanks.