[lttng-dev] [PATCH lttng-ust] Add ctor/dtor priorities for tracepoints/events
Olivier Dion
olivier.dion at polymtl.ca
Sun Jul 12 11:49:26 EDT 2020
On Sun, 12 Jul 2020, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers at efficios.com> wrote:
> ----- On Jul 11, 2020, at 11:29 AM, lttng-dev lttng-dev at lists.lttng.org wrote:
>
>> Some library might want to generate events in their ctor/dtor. If
>> LTTng initialize/finalize its tracepoints/events at the wrong time,
>> events are lost.
>>
>> Order of execution of the ctor/dtor is determined by priority. When
>> some priorities are equal, the order of execution seems to be
>> determined by:
>>
>> a) Order of appearance if in the same compilation unit
>>
>> b) Order of link if in different compilation units
>>
>> c) Order of load by ld-linux.so or dlopen(3) for
>> share objects
>
> I recall different rules about constructor priorities. Can you provide
> links to documentation stating the priority order you describe above ?
I haven't found any documentation on that. This is purely empirical.
Although I'm sure that we can dig something if chatting on GCC's IRC.
> Also, we should compare two approaches to fulfill your goal:
> one alternative would be to have application/library constructors
> explicitly call tracepoint constructors if they wish to use them.
I would prefer this way. The former solution might not work in some
cases (e.g. with LD_PRELOAD and priority =101) and I prefer explicit
initialization in that case.
I don't see any cons for the second approach, except making the symbols
table a few bytes larger. I'll post a patch soon so we can compare and
try to find more documentation on ctor priority.
--
Olivier Dion
PolyMtl
More information about the lttng-dev
mailing list