From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E32FFE9A047 for ; Wed, 18 Feb 2026 13:32:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1vshfC-0003sQ-Ql; Wed, 18 Feb 2026 08:32:22 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1vshfB-0003pY-4g for qemu-rust@nongnu.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2026 08:32:21 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.129.124]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1vshf2-0004bu-L4 for qemu-rust@nongnu.org; Wed, 18 Feb 2026 08:32:17 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1771421341; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=+zwGZT0fYBcH4e9OY06EKW4kH1mRUNPUA+1/6hhvtYU=; b=ce4A8fi4+f8gaJPzqMxuz5iNCWCd/siYWH0+8ZFV5JMXsV3QGLHD/J7+AOHdg0MlJF2aox zO16AmAPdsI7IQ68JVrpV0AVxxXFJqUx6ZwErPBUX5eqLm9BGGlufgNQSmp1td17IcFaNP XoIlMmDkVS5X0Q7hrmg/e0VG6Q9hJPw= Received: from mx-prod-mc-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-54-186-198-63.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [54.186.198.63]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-541-KwiOMsEBOfG9XuCBnPqA0w-1; Wed, 18 Feb 2026 08:23:48 -0500 X-MC-Unique: KwiOMsEBOfG9XuCBnPqA0w-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: KwiOMsEBOfG9XuCBnPqA0w_1771421026 Received: from mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.12]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB36D19560A7; Wed, 18 Feb 2026 13:23:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blackfin.pond.sub.org (unknown [10.45.242.14]) by mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D611A19560AD; Wed, 18 Feb 2026 13:23:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: by blackfin.pond.sub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 765E221E692D; Wed, 18 Feb 2026 14:23:42 +0100 (CET) From: Markus Armbruster To: Daniel P. =?utf-8?Q?Berrang=C3=A9?= Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Manos Pitsidianakis , Stefan Weil , "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" , Pierrick Bouvier , devel@lists.libvirt.org, Philippe =?utf-8?Q?Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9?= , =?utf-8?Q?Marc-Andr?= =?utf-8?Q?=C3=A9?= Lureau , Hanna Reitz , Kevin Wolf , qemu-block@nongnu.org, qemu-rust@nongnu.org, Paolo Bonzini , Gerd Hoffmann , Christian Schoenebeck , Richard Henderson Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 03/27] include: define constant for early constructor priority In-Reply-To: ("Daniel P. =?utf-8?Q?Berrang?= =?utf-8?Q?=C3=A9=22's?= message of "Wed, 18 Feb 2026 10:46:42 +0000") References: <20260211152508.732487-1-berrange@redhat.com> <20260211152508.732487-4-berrange@redhat.com> <87342yflt8.fsf@pond.sub.org> Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2026 14:23:42 +0100 Message-ID: <87ecmib2xt.fsf@pond.sub.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.0 on 10.30.177.12 X-Mimecast-MFC-PROC-ID: sywxb4LVoGsZAR1tL2u5YE-12fV1aTvAYqgiPrZEUtk_1771421026 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.129.124; envelope-from=armbru@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -13 X-Spam_score: -1.4 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.043, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, GB_FAKE_RF=0.754, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-rust@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: QEMU Rust-related patches and discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-rust-bounces+qemu-rust=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-rust-bounces+qemu-rust=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Daniel P. Berrang=C3=A9 writes: > On Wed, Feb 18, 2026 at 10:22:27AM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> Daniel P. Berrang=C3=A9 writes: >>=20 >> > Functions marked with __attribute__((__constructor__)) will be >> > invoked in linker order. In theory this is well defined, but >> > in practice, it is hard to determine what this order will be >> > with the layers of indirection through meson, ninja and the >> > static libraries QEMU builds. >> > >> > Notably, the order currently appears different between Linux >> > and Windows (as tested with Wine on Linux). This can cause >> > problems when certain QEMU constructors have a dependancy on >> > other QEMU constructors. >> > >> > To address this define a QEMU_CONSTRUCTOR_EARLY constant which >> > provides a priority value that will run before other default >> > constructors. This is to be used for QEMU constructors that >> > are themselves self-contained, but may be relied upon by other >> > constructors. >> > >> > Reviewed-by: Richard Henderson >> > Reviewed-by: Dr. David Alan Gilbert >> > Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrang=C3=A9 >>=20 >> I'm no fan of doing non-trivial work in constructors. We discussed >> possible alternatives in review of v5. This is an opinion, not a >> demand. And Paolo's opinion counts a lot more here. > > I think that it is worth exploring the alternative idea, but not > as part of this series which is already getting way longer than > I would like. This constructor usage is trivially removed later > if we get there. Fair!