In fact, I just want to find a practical way to make the crt work.
Currently, I did the following configure in my port:

include "elfos.h" in tm.h
define HAS_INIT_SECTION
undefine OBJECT_FORMAT_ELF
define INVOKE__main
use default INIT_SECTION_OP

My port is working on a bare metal machine with newlib support. Seems
I fall into an spurious configure for compiling crtstuff.c. Could you
give me some guide to lead me back to common configuration of this?
Thanks.

Lei



2016-11-04 10:33 GMT-04:00 Ian Lance Taylor <i...@google.com>:
> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 7:20 PM, Lei Wang <lei.wang.l...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The brief structure of libgcc/crtstuff.c is as follows:
>>
>> #ifdef CRT_BEGIN
>> …
>> #elif defined(CRT_END)
>> ...
>> #  ifdef OBJECT_FORMAT_ELF
>> …
>> #  else
>>
>> static void
>> __do_global_ctors_aux (void)    /* prologue goes in .text section */
>> {
>>   asm (__LIBGCC_INIT_SECTION_ASM_OP__);
>>   DO_GLOBAL_CTORS_BODY;
>>   atexit (__do_global_dtors);
>> }                               /* epilogue and body go in .init section */
>>
>> FORCE_CODE_SECTION_ALIGN
>> asm (__LIBGCC_TEXT_SECTION_ASM_OP__);
>>
>> #endif  // OBJECT_FORMAT_ELF
>>
>> #else // !CRT_BEGIN && !CRT_END
>> …
>> #endif
>>
>> The __do_global_ctors_aux function shown above is static and without “used” 
>> attribute which result in optimizing out when compiled with optimization. 
>> This currently causes my port failed.
>> My understanding is that this function is supposed to be split into two 
>> parts: a prologue in .text section and the rest part in .init section. 
>> Meanwhile there is another symmetric function with the same name which is 
>> also split into two parts: an prologue in .init section and the rest part in 
>> .text section, which result in two identical copies of this function, one in 
>> .init section and the other in .text section.
>> Or is there any other purpose of this code?
>
> This code is all ridiculously complicated.  It's also not used on
> modern ELF systems, which use a .init_array section instead.  Tell us
> more about your port, and why you need to worry about this.
>
> Ian

Reply via email to