From: Craig Southeren <craigs@postincrement.com>
To: Alan Modra <amodra@gmail.com>
Cc: "binutils@sourceware.org" <binutils@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: PATCH: PR ld/12730: regression] crash when allocating in a static constructor
Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 00:37:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <F190AFD0-C345-4BCE-9EF8-A4A590235D73@postincrement.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110516001523.GC20800@bubble.grove.modra.org>
Hi Alan,
Thanks for taking the time to reply.
While there is a small part of me that would like to tilt against this particular windmill, the lack of any specific point of non-compliance means that I have no firm ground to stand-on.
In the end, it's would be about differences in interpretation of an ambiguous text based on historical precedents - which is an almost textbook recipe for a religious war.
I have no desire to cast the first stone, so I'm going to let this sleeping dog lie (and also stop mixing metaphors) :)
Craig
Sent from my iPhone
On 16/05/2011, at 10:15 AM, Alan Modra <amodra@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 08:14:19PM +1000, Craig Southeren wrote:
>> At the heart of the issue is the timing of initialising statics at
>> the global/namespace level.
>
> You won't get much traction on this issue here on the binutils list.
> We did have a ld bug that affected you but that has now been fixed.
> Further discussion should go to one of the gcc lists. If you can get
> agreement that functions declared with __attribute__ ((constructor))
> ought to be treated exactly as standard C++ namespace scope
> constructors regarding initialisation order, then it would be good to
> have your testcase added to the g++ testsuite. That should ensure
> both g++ and ld do not regress.
>
> FWIW, I think your testcase is quite reasonable. The main reason I
> wanted the testcase removed from the ld testsuite because I found
> the testcase failed using commonly available versions of g++, and
> therefore a C++ testcase wasn't the best way to test ld behaviour.
>
> --
> Alan Modra
> Australia Development Lab, IBM
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-16 0:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-15 10:14 Craig Southeren
2011-05-16 0:15 ` Alan Modra
2011-05-16 0:37 ` Craig Southeren [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-05-05 5:19 H.J. Lu
2011-05-05 8:27 ` Alan Modra
2011-05-05 13:27 ` H.J. Lu
2011-05-05 14:13 ` Alan Modra
2011-05-06 13:23 ` H.J. Lu
2011-05-06 16:16 ` H.J. Lu
2011-05-07 8:11 ` Alan Modra
2011-05-07 13:40 ` H.J. Lu
2011-05-07 14:05 ` Alan Modra
2011-05-09 13:53 ` Alan Modra
2011-05-09 14:09 ` H.J. Lu
2011-06-19 19:18 ` Thomas Schwinge
2011-06-21 15:14 ` Nick Clifton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=F190AFD0-C345-4BCE-9EF8-A4A590235D73@postincrement.com \
--to=craigs@postincrement.com \
--cc=amodra@gmail.com \
--cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).