Re: PING: PATCH: PR target/46770: Use .init_array/.fini_array sections

["H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 5:31 AM, Richard Guenther
<richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 6:31 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 8:57 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 6:05 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 7:57 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 11:40 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 12:28 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 2:40 AM, Richard Guenther
>>>>>>> <richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 12:12 AM, H.J. Lu <hongjiu.lu@intel.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 05:20:48PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> This patch uses .init_array/.fini_array sections instead of
>>>>>>>>>> .ctors/.dtors sections if mixing .init_array/.fini_array and
>>>>>>>>>> .ctors/.dtors sections with init_priority works.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It removes .ctors/.ctors sections from executables and DSOes, which will
>>>>>>>>>> remove one function call at startup time from each executable and DSO.
>>>>>>>>>> It should reduce image size and improve system startup time.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If a platform with a working .init_array/.fini_array support needs a
>>>>>>>>>> different .init_array/.fini_array implementation, it can set
>>>>>>>>>> use_initfini_array to no.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Since .init_array/.fini_array is a target feature. --enable-initfini-array
>>>>>>>>>> is default to no unless the native run-time test is passed.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> To pass the native run-time test, a linker with SORT_BY_INIT_PRIORITY
>>>>>>>>>> support is required.  The binutils patch is available at
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2010-12/msg00466.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Linker patch has been checked in.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This patch passed 32bit/64bit regression test on Linux/x86-64.  Any
>>>>>>>>>> comments?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This updated patch fixes build on Linux/ia64 and should work on others.
>>>>>>>>> Any comments?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes.  This is stage1 material.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here is the updated patch.  OK for trunk?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> H.J.
>>>>>>> ----
>>>>>>> 2011-03-14  H.J. Lu  <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>        PR target/46770
>>>>>>>        * acinclude.m4 (gcc_AC_INITFINI_ARRAY): Removed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>        * config.gcc (use_initfini_array): New variable.
>>>>>>>        Use initfini-array.o if supported.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>        * crtstuff.c: Don't generate .ctors nor .dtors sections if
>>>>>>>        NO_CTORS_DTORS_SECTIONS is defined.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>        * configure.ac: Remove gcc_AC_INITFINI_ARRAY.  Add
>>>>>>>        --enable-initfini-array and check if .init_array can be used with
>>>>>>>        .ctors.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>        * configure: Regenerated.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>        * config/initfini-array.c: New.
>>>>>>>        * config/initfini-array.h: Likewise.
>>>>>>>        * config/t-initfini-array: Likewise.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>        * config/arm/arm.c (arm_asm_init_sections): Call
>>>>>>>        elf_initfini_array_init_sections if NO_CTORS_DTORS_SECTIONS
>>>>>>>        is defined.
>>>>>>>        * config/avr/avr.c (avr_asm_init_sections): Likewise.
>>>>>>>        * config/ia64/ia64.c (ia64_asm_init_sections): Likewise.
>>>>>>>        * config/mep/mep.c (mep_asm_init_sections): Likewise.
>>>>>>>        * config/microblaze/microblaze.c (microblaze_elf_asm_init_sections):
>>>>>>>        Likewise.
>>>>>>>        * config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_elf_asm_init_sections): Likewise.
>>>>>>>        * config/stormy16/stormy16.c (xstormy16_asm_init_sections):
>>>>>>>        Likewise.
>>>>>>>        * config/v850/v850.c (v850_asm_init_sections): Likewise.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> PING:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg00760.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Any comments?  Any objections?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Here is the patch updated for the current trunk.  OK for trunk?
>>>>
>>>
>>> PING,.
>>
>> Hi Richard,
>>
>> You commented my patch was stage 1 material:
>>
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-01/msg01989.html
>>
>> Is my patch:
>>
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg00760.html
>>
>> OK for trunk?
>
> I can't approve the configury changes and would like to defer
> to target maintainers for the target specific changes.  That said,
> I'm not familiar enough with the area of the patch.  But yes,
> it's stage1 now - so if anyone else wants to approve this patch...

My first attempt:

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-12/msg00589.html

only affects x86.  I changed it to generic based on the
feedbacks.  But other target maintainers show no interests.
Should I make it x86 only first?  Each target can enable it
if needed.

Thanks.

-- 
H.J.