Hi! I addressed your comments regarding all the 3 patches and sent v4 for review («[PATCH v4 0/2] box: implement on_shutdown triggers») As for this particular patch, I made it independent from the next one, so it may be dropped altogether if you wish. > 28 дек. 2018 г., в 10:58, Vladimir Davydov написал(а): > > On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 10:43:26AM +0300, Konstantin Osipov wrote: >> * Vladimir Davydov [18/12/27 16:00]: >>>>> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 04:24:38PM +0300, Serge Petrenko wrote: >>>>>> Move a call to tarantool_free() to the end of main(). >>>>>> Also instead of breaking the event loop directly when processing a >>>>>> signal start a fiber which can do some work before event loop break and >>>>>> then break the event loop (this will be helpful when on_shutdown >>>>>> triggers are implemented to run them while ev loop active). >>>>>> Only wal_thread_stop() is left in atexit() to make sure we close the >>>>>> journal in case the user exits by typing os.exit() to the console. >>>>> >>>>> I don't understand why you need to do it in the scope of the issue >>>>> you're intending to fix. You can start a fiber from SITERM/SIGINT signal >>>>> handler and run on_shutdown triggers from it without atexit rework, >>>>> right? >>>> >>>> I asked Sergey to refactor our atexit machinery. I want atexit >>>> handlers to be able to run the event loop, all such handlers, not >>>> just the exit trigger. >>> >>> But this isn't what this patch does - it just moves some code from >>> atexit() to the end of main, after the event loop is stopped. >> >> This is OK for existing handlers, since they don't require an >> event loop today. > > Then why move them from atexit() to the end of main()? It doesn't > achieve anything, it doesn't have anything to do with on_shutdown > trigger. For some reason, we just stop freeing memory if the program > terminates by exit()-ing. >