Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2018 12:34:17 +0100
From: Gernot Reisinger <Gernot.Reisinger@...ino.at>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com, dalias@...c.org
Subject: Re: Question regarding dynamic loader

Thanks a lot for this exhaustive explanation - helps a lot to understand
the different initialization stages. I agree, one should not assume a
specific execution sequence of these initialization routines.


Am Mi., 21. Nov. 2018 um 17:41 Uhr schrieb Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net>:

> * Gernot Reisinger <Gernot.Reisinger@...ino.at> [2018-11-21 16:52:53
> +0100]:
> > I did no extensive research how glibc executes these constructor calls.
> At
> > least the call stack indicates that they are partially executed in
> dynamic
> > linker context - _dl_start_user () in /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so
> > calling _dl_init.
>
> the dynamic linker runs the
> - preinit_array functions of the main executable,
> - the init_array and DT_INIT functions of shared libraries.
>
> then via __libc_start_main the _init and init_array functions
> of the main executable are run by libc_nonshared.a code that
> is linked into the executable.
>
> so part of the initialization (main exe) does require entry
> via __libc_start_main (but this is not an issue for go).
>
> however this design can change when glibc introduces a new
> symbol version for __libc_start_main, so i don't see how
> go can rely on any of this.
>
>

Content of type "text/html" skipped

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.