* [PATCH] coverage: fix on ARM
@ 2013-02-22 10:57 Ian Campbell
2013-02-22 11:16 ` Jan Beulich
2013-02-27 13:17 ` Ian Campbell
0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Ian Campbell @ 2013-02-22 10:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xen-devel; +Cc: Frediano Ziglio, keir, Ian Campbell
Use a list of pointers to simplify the handling of 32- vs 64-bit.
Also on ARM the section name is ".init_array" and not ".ctors".
Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
Cc: Frediano Ziglio <frediano.ziglio@citrix.com>
Cc: keir@xen.org
---
This applies independently of my 64-bit ARM series.
---
xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S | 10 ++++------
xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S | 6 ++----
xen/common/lib.c | 13 +++++--------
3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S b/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S
index 9043994..fd755d7 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S
@@ -91,12 +91,10 @@ SECTIONS
*(.init.data.rel)
*(.init.data.rel.*)
- . = ALIGN(4);
- __CTOR_LIST__ = .;
- LONG((__CTOR_END__ - __CTOR_LIST__) / 4 - 2)
- *(.ctors)
- LONG(0)
- __CTOR_END__ = .;
+ . = ALIGN(8);
+ __ctors_start = .;
+ *(.init_array)
+ __ctors_end = .;
} :text
. = ALIGN(32);
.init.setup : {
diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S b/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S
index 5570389..d959941 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S
@@ -110,11 +110,9 @@ SECTIONS
__trampoline_seg_stop = .;
. = ALIGN(8);
- __CTOR_LIST__ = .;
- QUAD((__CTOR_END__ - __CTOR_LIST__) / 8 - 2)
+ __ctors_start = .;
*(.ctors)
- QUAD(0)
- __CTOR_END__ = .;
+ __ctors_end = .;
} :text
. = ALIGN(32);
.init.setup : {
diff --git a/xen/common/lib.c b/xen/common/lib.c
index e0c65cf..6b80601 100644
--- a/xen/common/lib.c
+++ b/xen/common/lib.c
@@ -479,17 +479,14 @@ unsigned long long parse_size_and_unit(const char *s, const char **ps)
return ret;
}
-extern const struct
-{
- unsigned long count;
- void (*funcs[1])(void);
-} __CTOR_LIST__;
+typedef void (*ctor_func_t)(void);
+extern const ctor_func_t __ctors_start[], __ctors_end[];
void __init init_constructors(void)
{
- unsigned long n;
- for ( n = 0; n < __CTOR_LIST__.count; ++n )
- __CTOR_LIST__.funcs[n]();
+ const ctor_func_t *f;
+ for (f = __ctors_start; f < __ctors_end; ++f )
+ (*f)();
}
/*
--
1.7.2.5
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] coverage: fix on ARM
2013-02-22 10:57 [PATCH] coverage: fix on ARM Ian Campbell
@ 2013-02-22 11:16 ` Jan Beulich
2013-02-22 11:24 ` Ian Campbell
2013-02-27 13:17 ` Ian Campbell
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jan Beulich @ 2013-02-22 11:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ian Campbell; +Cc: Frediano Ziglio, keir, xen-devel
>>> On 22.02.13 at 11:57, Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com> wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S
> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S
> @@ -91,12 +91,10 @@ SECTIONS
> *(.init.data.rel)
> *(.init.data.rel.*)
>
> - . = ALIGN(4);
> - __CTOR_LIST__ = .;
> - LONG((__CTOR_END__ - __CTOR_LIST__) / 4 - 2)
> - *(.ctors)
> - LONG(0)
> - __CTOR_END__ = .;
> + . = ALIGN(8);
> + __ctors_start = .;
> + *(.init_array)
Is this renaming from .ctors to .init_array really intended (i.e. was
using .ctors here wrong)?
Jan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] coverage: fix on ARM
2013-02-22 11:16 ` Jan Beulich
@ 2013-02-22 11:24 ` Ian Campbell
2013-02-22 11:41 ` Jan Beulich
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Ian Campbell @ 2013-02-22 11:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jan Beulich; +Cc: Frediano Ziglio, Keir (Xen.org), xen-devel@lists.xen.org
On Fri, 2013-02-22 at 11:16 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 22.02.13 at 11:57, Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com> wrote:
> > --- a/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S
> > +++ b/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S
> > @@ -91,12 +91,10 @@ SECTIONS
> > *(.init.data.rel)
> > *(.init.data.rel.*)
> >
> > - . = ALIGN(4);
> > - __CTOR_LIST__ = .;
> > - LONG((__CTOR_END__ - __CTOR_LIST__) / 4 - 2)
> > - *(.ctors)
> > - LONG(0)
> > - __CTOR_END__ = .;
> > + . = ALIGN(8);
> > + __ctors_start = .;
> > + *(.init_array)
>
> Is this renaming from .ctors to .init_array really intended (i.e. was
> using .ctors here wrong)?
Yes, I mentioned it in the commit message, it is called .init_array on
ARM for whatever reason. Probably either historical accident or
compatibility eg. with ARM's compilers.
Ian.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] coverage: fix on ARM
2013-02-22 11:24 ` Ian Campbell
@ 2013-02-22 11:41 ` Jan Beulich
2013-02-22 11:44 ` Ian Campbell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jan Beulich @ 2013-02-22 11:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ian Campbell; +Cc: Frediano Ziglio, Keir (Xen.org), xen-devel@lists.xen.org
>>> On 22.02.13 at 12:24, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-02-22 at 11:16 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 22.02.13 at 11:57, Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com> wrote:
>> > --- a/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S
>> > +++ b/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S
>> > @@ -91,12 +91,10 @@ SECTIONS
>> > *(.init.data.rel)
>> > *(.init.data.rel.*)
>> >
>> > - . = ALIGN(4);
>> > - __CTOR_LIST__ = .;
>> > - LONG((__CTOR_END__ - __CTOR_LIST__) / 4 - 2)
>> > - *(.ctors)
>> > - LONG(0)
>> > - __CTOR_END__ = .;
>> > + . = ALIGN(8);
>> > + __ctors_start = .;
>> > + *(.init_array)
>>
>> Is this renaming from .ctors to .init_array really intended (i.e. was
>> using .ctors here wrong)?
>
> Yes, I mentioned it in the commit message,
Oops, sorry, managed to skip that line somehow.
> it is called .init_array on
> ARM for whatever reason. Probably either historical accident or
> compatibility eg. with ARM's compilers.
Or rather the other way around, because .init_array is a (newer)
ELF concept, whereas .ctors isn't.
Jan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] coverage: fix on ARM
2013-02-22 11:41 ` Jan Beulich
@ 2013-02-22 11:44 ` Ian Campbell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Ian Campbell @ 2013-02-22 11:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jan Beulich; +Cc: Frediano Ziglio, Keir (Xen.org), xen-devel@lists.xen.org
On Fri, 2013-02-22 at 11:41 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 22.02.13 at 12:24, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-02-22 at 11:16 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> >>> On 22.02.13 at 11:57, Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com> wrote:
> >> > --- a/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S
> >> > +++ b/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S
> >> > @@ -91,12 +91,10 @@ SECTIONS
> >> > *(.init.data.rel)
> >> > *(.init.data.rel.*)
> >> >
> >> > - . = ALIGN(4);
> >> > - __CTOR_LIST__ = .;
> >> > - LONG((__CTOR_END__ - __CTOR_LIST__) / 4 - 2)
> >> > - *(.ctors)
> >> > - LONG(0)
> >> > - __CTOR_END__ = .;
> >> > + . = ALIGN(8);
> >> > + __ctors_start = .;
> >> > + *(.init_array)
> >>
> >> Is this renaming from .ctors to .init_array really intended (i.e. was
> >> using .ctors here wrong)?
> >
> > Yes, I mentioned it in the commit message,
>
> Oops, sorry, managed to skip that line somehow.
>
> > it is called .init_array on
> > ARM for whatever reason. Probably either historical accident or
> > compatibility eg. with ARM's compilers.
>
> Or rather the other way around, because .init_array is a (newer)
> ELF concept, whereas .ctors isn't.
Ah, that explains it, thanks!
Ian.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] coverage: fix on ARM
2013-02-22 10:57 [PATCH] coverage: fix on ARM Ian Campbell
2013-02-22 11:16 ` Jan Beulich
@ 2013-02-27 13:17 ` Ian Campbell
2013-02-27 18:19 ` Keir Fraser
2013-02-28 10:00 ` Frediano Ziglio
1 sibling, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Ian Campbell @ 2013-02-27 13:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xen-devel@lists.xen.org; +Cc: Frediano Ziglio, Keir (Xen.org)
On Fri, 2013-02-22 at 10:57 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
> Use a list of pointers to simplify the handling of 32- vs 64-bit.
>
> Also on ARM the section name is ".init_array" and not ".ctors".
Any comments/ack/nacks?
> Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
> Cc: Frediano Ziglio <frediano.ziglio@citrix.com>
> Cc: keir@xen.org
> ---
> This applies independently of my 64-bit ARM series.
> ---
> xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S | 10 ++++------
> xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S | 6 ++----
> xen/common/lib.c | 13 +++++--------
> 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S b/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S
> index 9043994..fd755d7 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S
> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S
> @@ -91,12 +91,10 @@ SECTIONS
> *(.init.data.rel)
> *(.init.data.rel.*)
>
> - . = ALIGN(4);
> - __CTOR_LIST__ = .;
> - LONG((__CTOR_END__ - __CTOR_LIST__) / 4 - 2)
> - *(.ctors)
> - LONG(0)
> - __CTOR_END__ = .;
> + . = ALIGN(8);
> + __ctors_start = .;
> + *(.init_array)
> + __ctors_end = .;
> } :text
> . = ALIGN(32);
> .init.setup : {
> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S b/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S
> index 5570389..d959941 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S
> @@ -110,11 +110,9 @@ SECTIONS
> __trampoline_seg_stop = .;
>
> . = ALIGN(8);
> - __CTOR_LIST__ = .;
> - QUAD((__CTOR_END__ - __CTOR_LIST__) / 8 - 2)
> + __ctors_start = .;
> *(.ctors)
> - QUAD(0)
> - __CTOR_END__ = .;
> + __ctors_end = .;
> } :text
> . = ALIGN(32);
> .init.setup : {
> diff --git a/xen/common/lib.c b/xen/common/lib.c
> index e0c65cf..6b80601 100644
> --- a/xen/common/lib.c
> +++ b/xen/common/lib.c
> @@ -479,17 +479,14 @@ unsigned long long parse_size_and_unit(const char *s, const char **ps)
> return ret;
> }
>
> -extern const struct
> -{
> - unsigned long count;
> - void (*funcs[1])(void);
> -} __CTOR_LIST__;
> +typedef void (*ctor_func_t)(void);
> +extern const ctor_func_t __ctors_start[], __ctors_end[];
>
> void __init init_constructors(void)
> {
> - unsigned long n;
> - for ( n = 0; n < __CTOR_LIST__.count; ++n )
> - __CTOR_LIST__.funcs[n]();
> + const ctor_func_t *f;
> + for (f = __ctors_start; f < __ctors_end; ++f )
> + (*f)();
> }
>
> /*
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] coverage: fix on ARM
2013-02-27 13:17 ` Ian Campbell
@ 2013-02-27 18:19 ` Keir Fraser
2013-02-28 10:00 ` Frediano Ziglio
1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Keir Fraser @ 2013-02-27 18:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ian Campbell, xen-devel@lists.xen.org; +Cc: Frediano Ziglio
On 27/02/2013 13:17, "Ian Campbell" <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-02-22 at 10:57 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
>> Use a list of pointers to simplify the handling of 32- vs 64-bit.
>>
>> Also on ARM the section name is ".init_array" and not ".ctors".
>
> Any comments/ack/nacks?
If it works, it's good by me ;)
-- Keir
>> Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
>> Cc: Frediano Ziglio <frediano.ziglio@citrix.com>
>> Cc: keir@xen.org
>> ---
>> This applies independently of my 64-bit ARM series.
>> ---
>> xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S | 10 ++++------
>> xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S | 6 ++----
>> xen/common/lib.c | 13 +++++--------
>> 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S b/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S
>> index 9043994..fd755d7 100644
>> --- a/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S
>> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S
>> @@ -91,12 +91,10 @@ SECTIONS
>> *(.init.data.rel)
>> *(.init.data.rel.*)
>>
>> - . = ALIGN(4);
>> - __CTOR_LIST__ = .;
>> - LONG((__CTOR_END__ - __CTOR_LIST__) / 4 - 2)
>> - *(.ctors)
>> - LONG(0)
>> - __CTOR_END__ = .;
>> + . = ALIGN(8);
>> + __ctors_start = .;
>> + *(.init_array)
>> + __ctors_end = .;
>> } :text
>> . = ALIGN(32);
>> .init.setup : {
>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S b/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S
>> index 5570389..d959941 100644
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S
>> @@ -110,11 +110,9 @@ SECTIONS
>> __trampoline_seg_stop = .;
>>
>> . = ALIGN(8);
>> - __CTOR_LIST__ = .;
>> - QUAD((__CTOR_END__ - __CTOR_LIST__) / 8 - 2)
>> + __ctors_start = .;
>> *(.ctors)
>> - QUAD(0)
>> - __CTOR_END__ = .;
>> + __ctors_end = .;
>> } :text
>> . = ALIGN(32);
>> .init.setup : {
>> diff --git a/xen/common/lib.c b/xen/common/lib.c
>> index e0c65cf..6b80601 100644
>> --- a/xen/common/lib.c
>> +++ b/xen/common/lib.c
>> @@ -479,17 +479,14 @@ unsigned long long parse_size_and_unit(const char *s,
>> const char **ps)
>> return ret;
>> }
>>
>> -extern const struct
>> -{
>> - unsigned long count;
>> - void (*funcs[1])(void);
>> -} __CTOR_LIST__;
>> +typedef void (*ctor_func_t)(void);
>> +extern const ctor_func_t __ctors_start[], __ctors_end[];
>>
>> void __init init_constructors(void)
>> {
>> - unsigned long n;
>> - for ( n = 0; n < __CTOR_LIST__.count; ++n )
>> - __CTOR_LIST__.funcs[n]();
>> + const ctor_func_t *f;
>> + for (f = __ctors_start; f < __ctors_end; ++f )
>> + (*f)();
>> }
>>
>> /*
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] coverage: fix on ARM
2013-02-27 13:17 ` Ian Campbell
2013-02-27 18:19 ` Keir Fraser
@ 2013-02-28 10:00 ` Frediano Ziglio
2013-02-28 10:17 ` Ian Campbell
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Frediano Ziglio @ 2013-02-28 10:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ian Campbell; +Cc: Frediano Ziglio, Keir (Xen.org), xen-devel@lists.xen.org
On Wed, 2013-02-27 at 13:17 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-02-22 at 10:57 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > Use a list of pointers to simplify the handling of 32- vs 64-bit.
> >
> > Also on ARM the section name is ".init_array" and not ".ctors".
>
> Any comments/ack/nacks?
>
Looks fine to me. Did you test it? Actually the way I test is:
- compile with coverage
- run xencov to extract information (more or less for x64 is 500k)
- check file content to see if counters increase while taking multiple
snapshot (xencov read - | hexdump -C | tail -100, counters are after
0CTX string which means "Xen Test Coverage count 0")
- reset counters (but this has nothing to do with constructors)
I actually cannot test for Arm.
Oh.. there is a missing space after a "for("
Frediano
> > Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
> > Cc: Frediano Ziglio <frediano.ziglio@citrix.com>
> > Cc: keir@xen.org
> > ---
> > This applies independently of my 64-bit ARM series.
> > ---
> > xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S | 10 ++++------
> > xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S | 6 ++----
> > xen/common/lib.c | 13 +++++--------
> > 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S b/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S
> > index 9043994..fd755d7 100644
> > --- a/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S
> > +++ b/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S
> > @@ -91,12 +91,10 @@ SECTIONS
> > *(.init.data.rel)
> > *(.init.data.rel.*)
> >
> > - . = ALIGN(4);
> > - __CTOR_LIST__ = .;
> > - LONG((__CTOR_END__ - __CTOR_LIST__) / 4 - 2)
> > - *(.ctors)
> > - LONG(0)
> > - __CTOR_END__ = .;
> > + . = ALIGN(8);
> > + __ctors_start = .;
> > + *(.init_array)
> > + __ctors_end = .;
> > } :text
> > . = ALIGN(32);
> > .init.setup : {
> > diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S b/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S
> > index 5570389..d959941 100644
> > --- a/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S
> > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S
> > @@ -110,11 +110,9 @@ SECTIONS
> > __trampoline_seg_stop = .;
> >
> > . = ALIGN(8);
> > - __CTOR_LIST__ = .;
> > - QUAD((__CTOR_END__ - __CTOR_LIST__) / 8 - 2)
> > + __ctors_start = .;
> > *(.ctors)
> > - QUAD(0)
> > - __CTOR_END__ = .;
> > + __ctors_end = .;
> > } :text
> > . = ALIGN(32);
> > .init.setup : {
> > diff --git a/xen/common/lib.c b/xen/common/lib.c
> > index e0c65cf..6b80601 100644
> > --- a/xen/common/lib.c
> > +++ b/xen/common/lib.c
> > @@ -479,17 +479,14 @@ unsigned long long parse_size_and_unit(const char *s, const char **ps)
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > -extern const struct
> > -{
> > - unsigned long count;
> > - void (*funcs[1])(void);
> > -} __CTOR_LIST__;
> > +typedef void (*ctor_func_t)(void);
> > +extern const ctor_func_t __ctors_start[], __ctors_end[];
> >
> > void __init init_constructors(void)
> > {
> > - unsigned long n;
> > - for ( n = 0; n < __CTOR_LIST__.count; ++n )
> > - __CTOR_LIST__.funcs[n]();
> > + const ctor_func_t *f;
> > + for (f = __ctors_start; f < __ctors_end; ++f )
> > + (*f)();
> > }
> >
> > /*
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] coverage: fix on ARM
2013-02-28 10:00 ` Frediano Ziglio
@ 2013-02-28 10:17 ` Ian Campbell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Ian Campbell @ 2013-02-28 10:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Frediano Ziglio; +Cc: Keir (Xen.org), xen-devel@lists.xen.org
On Thu, 2013-02-28 at 10:00 +0000, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-02-27 at 13:17 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-02-22 at 10:57 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > Use a list of pointers to simplify the handling of 32- vs 64-bit.
> > >
> > > Also on ARM the section name is ".init_array" and not ".ctors".
> >
> > Any comments/ack/nacks?
> >
>
> Looks fine to me. Did you test it?
I tested on x86_64 and arm32/64 by annotating the init function to print
the function names as it called them and observing that a) a bunch of
functions were called (on x86 it looked similar before and after this
change) and b) it didn't crash.
> Actually the way I test is:
> - compile with coverage
> - run xencov to extract information (more or less for x64 is 500k)
> - check file content to see if counters increase while taking multiple
> snapshot (xencov read - | hexdump -C | tail -100, counters are after
> 0CTX string which means "Xen Test Coverage count 0")
> - reset counters (but this has nothing to do with constructors)
>
> I actually cannot test for Arm.
>
> Oh.. there is a missing space after a "for("
So there is, thanks for spotting. A resend will have to wait until after
my flight to Hong Kong or else whoever applies, which may end up being
me, can fix it as they go.
Cheers,
Ian.
>
> Frediano
>
> > > Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
> > > Cc: Frediano Ziglio <frediano.ziglio@citrix.com>
> > > Cc: keir@xen.org
> > > ---
> > > This applies independently of my 64-bit ARM series.
> > > ---
> > > xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S | 10 ++++------
> > > xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S | 6 ++----
> > > xen/common/lib.c | 13 +++++--------
> > > 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S b/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S
> > > index 9043994..fd755d7 100644
> > > --- a/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S
> > > +++ b/xen/arch/arm/xen.lds.S
> > > @@ -91,12 +91,10 @@ SECTIONS
> > > *(.init.data.rel)
> > > *(.init.data.rel.*)
> > >
> > > - . = ALIGN(4);
> > > - __CTOR_LIST__ = .;
> > > - LONG((__CTOR_END__ - __CTOR_LIST__) / 4 - 2)
> > > - *(.ctors)
> > > - LONG(0)
> > > - __CTOR_END__ = .;
> > > + . = ALIGN(8);
> > > + __ctors_start = .;
> > > + *(.init_array)
> > > + __ctors_end = .;
> > > } :text
> > > . = ALIGN(32);
> > > .init.setup : {
> > > diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S b/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S
> > > index 5570389..d959941 100644
> > > --- a/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S
> > > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/xen.lds.S
> > > @@ -110,11 +110,9 @@ SECTIONS
> > > __trampoline_seg_stop = .;
> > >
> > > . = ALIGN(8);
> > > - __CTOR_LIST__ = .;
> > > - QUAD((__CTOR_END__ - __CTOR_LIST__) / 8 - 2)
> > > + __ctors_start = .;
> > > *(.ctors)
> > > - QUAD(0)
> > > - __CTOR_END__ = .;
> > > + __ctors_end = .;
> > > } :text
> > > . = ALIGN(32);
> > > .init.setup : {
> > > diff --git a/xen/common/lib.c b/xen/common/lib.c
> > > index e0c65cf..6b80601 100644
> > > --- a/xen/common/lib.c
> > > +++ b/xen/common/lib.c
> > > @@ -479,17 +479,14 @@ unsigned long long parse_size_and_unit(const char *s, const char **ps)
> > > return ret;
> > > }
> > >
> > > -extern const struct
> > > -{
> > > - unsigned long count;
> > > - void (*funcs[1])(void);
> > > -} __CTOR_LIST__;
> > > +typedef void (*ctor_func_t)(void);
> > > +extern const ctor_func_t __ctors_start[], __ctors_end[];
> > >
> > > void __init init_constructors(void)
> > > {
> > > - unsigned long n;
> > > - for ( n = 0; n < __CTOR_LIST__.count; ++n )
> > > - __CTOR_LIST__.funcs[n]();
> > > + const ctor_func_t *f;
> > > + for (f = __ctors_start; f < __ctors_end; ++f )
> > > + (*f)();
> > > }
> > >
> > > /*
> >
> >
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-02-28 10:17 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-02-22 10:57 [PATCH] coverage: fix on ARM Ian Campbell
2013-02-22 11:16 ` Jan Beulich
2013-02-22 11:24 ` Ian Campbell
2013-02-22 11:41 ` Jan Beulich
2013-02-22 11:44 ` Ian Campbell
2013-02-27 13:17 ` Ian Campbell
2013-02-27 18:19 ` Keir Fraser
2013-02-28 10:00 ` Frediano Ziglio
2013-02-28 10:17 ` Ian Campbell
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.