https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99759
Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |amodra at gmail dot com
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #2 from Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com> ---
> this means the ctors.65535 will come last.
Nope, it will come first. And since DT_INIT_ARRAY pointers are executed in the
order they appear in the array, it will be one of the first to run.
.init_array and .ctors sorting is complicated. ld.bfd will sort .init_array.0
(highest priority .init_array section) and .ctors.65535 (highest priority
.ctors section) together.
I assume this comment:
> The input section description is quite close but does not sort .init_array.*
> and .ctors.* with the same priority together.
is referring to lld.
> I don't see any issue here really in the end because GCC will produce
> init_array most of the time.
So the issue really is that lld doesn't support mixing of .ctors.* and
.init_array.*.
It might be nice for libgcc to use .init_array.0 here instead of .ctors.65536
whenever gcc will use .init_array in compiled code.
