How can I handle exit() calls in 3rd party library

问题:

I'm working on a C++ application which uses a library written in C by another team. The writers of the library like to call exit() when errors happen, which ends the program immediately without calling the destructors of objects on the stack in the C++ application. The application sets up some system resources which don't automatically get reclaimed by the operating system after the process ends (shared memory regions, interprocess mutexes, etc), so this is a problem.

I have complete source code for both the app and the library, but the library is very well-established and has no unit tests, so changing it would be a big deal. Is there a way to "hook" the calls to exit() so I can implement graceful shutdown for my app?

One possibility I'm considering is making one big class which is the application - meaning all cleanup would happen either in its destructor or in the destructor of one of its members - then allocating one of these big objects on the heap in main(), setting a global pointer to point to it, and using atexit() to register a handler which simply deletes the object via the global pointer. Is that likely to work?

Is there a known good way to approach this problem?

回答1:

In the very worst case, you can always write your own implementation of exit and link it rather than the system's own implementation. You can handle the errors there, and optionally call _exit(2) yourself.

Since you have the library source, it's even easier - just add a -Dexit=myExit flag when building it, and then provide an implementation of myExit.

回答2:

install exit handler with atexit and implement the desired behavior

回答3:

If you want to make the C library more usable from C++, you could perhaps run it in a separate process. Then make sure (with an exit handler or otherwise) that when it exits, your main application process notices and throws an exception to unwind its own stack. Perhaps in some cases it could handle the error in a non-fatal way.

Of course, moving the library use into another process might not be easy or particularly efficient. You'll have some work to do to wrap the interface, and to copy inputs and outputs via the IPC mechanism of your choice.

As a workaround to use the library from your main process, though, I think the one you describe should work. The risk is that you can't identify and isolate everything that needs cleaning up, or that someone in future modifies your application (or another component you use) on the assumption that the stack will get unwound normally.

You could modify the library source to call a runtime- or compile-time-configurable function instead of calling exit(). Then compile the library with exception-handling and implement the function in C++ to throw an exception. The trouble with that is that the library itself probably leaks resources on error, so you'd have to use that exception only to unwind the stack (and maybe do some error reporting). Don't catch it and continue even if the error could be non-fatal as far as your app is concerned.

回答4:

If the call exit and not assert or abort, there are a few points to get control again:

• When calling exit, the destructors for objects with static lifetime (essentially: globals and objects declared with static) are still executed. This means you could set up a (few) global "resource manager" object(s) and release the resources in their destructor(s).
• As you already found, you can register hooks with atexit. This is not limited to one. You can register more.

If all else fails, because you have the source of the library, you can play some macro tricks to effectively replace the calls to exit with a function of your own that could, for example, throw an exception.