E5ten added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/lib/Driver/ToolChains/Gnu.cpp:563 + crtend = Args.hasArg(options::OPT_shared) || IsPIE || IsStaticPIE ? + "crtend_shared" : "crtend"; + CmdArgs.push_back(ToolChain.getCompilerRTArgString( ---------------- phosek wrote: > MaskRay wrote: > > phosek wrote: > > > MaskRay wrote: > > > > I believe `crtbegin.o` `crtend.o` should just work. It is not necessary > > > > to use `crtbegin_shared.o` `crtend_shared.o`. > > > This is related to your comments on D28791, specifically that we should > > > be using `crtbegin_shared.o` for `-shared` or `-pie` and `crtbegin.o` > > > otherwise, is that not the case? > > Yes. I think we can rename `crtbegin_shared.o` to `crtbegin.o` and use it > > for every configuration: `-no-pie` `-pie` `-shared` `-static` `-static > > -pie`. > We've checked the glibc implementation of `__cxa_finalize`. A nonzero > `__dso_handle` has to match the value passed to `__cxa_atexit` but a zero > `__dso_handle` matches every function registered. So it matters that DSO fini > calls use `&__dso_handle` to match their registrations for the `dlclose` > case, but it also matters that the main executable fini call use zero to run > all the dtors at exit time. It's not clear it really needs to be that way, > but it would affect how the dtors get run which might affect some use cases. > Hence, I don't think we can combine `crtbegin.o` and `crtbegin_shared.o`. I may be wrong but from what I can see crtend and crtend_shared are identical, so while the crtbegins must stay separate can't the 2 crtends be merged into one that gets used in all cases instead of having a duplicate object under a different name? Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D59264/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D59264 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
