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

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

On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 11:39 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 5:51 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 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.
>>
>
> I am enclosing 2 patches here.  One only affects Linux/x86
> and the other covers all targets.  I tested both versions on
> Linux/x86 without any regressions.  Since I only got OK from
> one target maintainer and I have been pinging on this patch
> for more than 6 months, I'd like to get it enabled for Linux/x86
> soon.
>

Hi Ian,

I'd like to get this issue resolved, at least for Linux/x86. Can you
recommend how I should proceed?

Thanks.

-- 
H.J.