From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21433 invoked by alias); 11 Dec 2010 20:17:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 21343 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Dec 2010 20:17:30 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 20:17:21 +0000 From: "hjl.tools at gmail dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/46770] Replace .ctors/.dtors with .init_array/.fini_array on targets supporting them X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: target X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: hjl.tools at gmail dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: hjl.tools at gmail dot com X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.6.0 X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 20:17:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-12/txt/msg01216.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46770 --- Comment #26 from H.J. Lu 2010-12-11 20:16:56 UTC --- (In reply to comment #24) > Well, it sounds to me, then, that we would be introducing a binary > compatibility problem to make this change. If we're going to do it, I > think that means adding linker smarts that detect that there are both > .ctor.* and .init_array.* sections and issuing an error -- not a warning > -- together with a hint as to how to recompile so as to get either the > new or old behavior. (Some people will have binary libraries they can't > recompile, so we need to explain how to compile new code so that it > still uses .ctor.*.) Another thing, you have a binary archive with constructor priorities and you want to "interleave" your constructor priority with it: 1. It may not be possible due to priority integer. 2. You have to look at section name. 3. If a library uses .init_array, the priority digit in section name is different from the source. I don't think GCC really supports interleaving constructor priority at binary level. Unless GCC can guarantees one can interleave constructor priority in object files, I don't think we should worry about it with .init_array.