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]

Re: patch to make init_array work (2nd version; resend)

From: David Mosberger <davidm at napali dot hpl dot hp dot com>
To: Roland McGrath <roland at redhat dot com>
Cc: davidm at hpl dot hp dot com, libc-hacker at sources dot redhat dot com, hjl at lucon dot org
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 14:38:37 -0800
Subject: Re: patch to make init_array work (2nd version; resend)
References: <15818.58593.831718.648490@napali.hpl.hp.com><200211072229.gA7MTOY29236@magilla.sf.frob.com>
Reply-to: davidm at hpl dot hp dot com

>>>>> On Thu, 7 Nov 2002 14:29:24 -0800, Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com> said:

  >> Perhaps, but it would defeat the whole purpose of switching to
  >> init_array (see my previous mail about why any call in
  >> .init/.fini causes incorrect unwind info).

  Roland> Since this part of the section is generated normally along
  Roland> with the prologue, I would think that its unwind info would
  Roland> come out normally too.

For .init, wouldn't the new code have to go into the epilogue to
ensure that the .init_array entries are called after .init?

	--david

References:
- Re: patch to make init_array work (2nd version; resend)
  - From: David Mosberger
- Re: patch to make init_array work (2nd version; resend)
  - From: Roland McGrath

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]