Comment # 21 on bug 1133245 from Martin Li��ka

(In reply to Dr. Werner Fink from comment #20)
> (In reply to Martin Li��ka from comment #18)
> > > In fact in past I had used memory barriers in the body of for loops where
> > > the code was only in the boolean and incremental statement to avoid that
> > > those loops become removed.
> > 
> > Well you should probably use volatile for the variables which can be
> > influenced by a handlers. Doing that the memory barious should not be needed.
> 
> In fact using `volatile sig_atomic_t' does also work. Interesting question
> why the type sig_atomic_t is not defined with attribute volatile in
> <bits/types.h>

That's very good question, I asked the same! Can you please send a question to:
https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-help/

mailing list?