This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.
Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On Sat, Mar 02, 2002 at 11:13:13AM -0800, David Mosberger wrote: > >>>>> On Sat, 2 Mar 2002 10:59:39 -0800, "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org> said: > > HJ> The problem is you are searching all input files. It doesn't > HJ> matter they are used or not. > > Doesn't your patch do the same? It's safe to create the entries > needlessly, though it would obviously be better if that didn't happen. > If you know a way to do that, great. Mine stops as soon as all 3 sections are found. > > HJ> Here is a new patch. > > Looks to me like this could end up creating the same DT*ARRAY entries > multiple times, no? Mine checks the mask. It sets array/arraysz and the mask if the mask is 0. It only creates the DT entry if array is not 0. If the mask is not 0, array will be 0 and no duplicated DT entry will be added. > > HJ> Also, those new sections should be in the data segment. > > Good point. > > HJ> BTW, should we allow both .init/.fini and the array sections. > > Yes. > > HJ> If both exist, how should ld.so treat them? > > See the Sys V ABI. IIRC, .init gets executed before .init_array and > .fini_array gets executed before .fini. > How should we deal with "ld -init SYMBOL -fini SYMBOL"? Right now, ld will replace .init/.fini sections with those symbols. Should we add "-init-array SYMBOL"? H.J.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |