top button
Flag Notify
    Connect to us
      Site Registration

Site Registration

Optimizations in Constructors?

0 votes
418 views

I recently encountered a problem with a function was marked as a constructor. The source file was compiled with -O0, but it appears the function was optimized to the point it skipped some of the startup
code and jumped into the failure state (which called exit). I was able to restore desired behavior with '#pragma GCC optimize("O0")' around the function (even volatile tricks did not help).

The startup code had to do with an integrity check. The expected fingerprint was back-patched after compiling, and then recalculated at runtime. Then, a memcmp was made. It appears the compiler deduced that the allocation was a string of 0's and could never be equal to the runtime fingerprint, so its just omitted the code.

Is this expected behavior for functions marked as constructors (compiled with -O0)?

posted Jun 22, 2013 by anonymous

Share this question
Facebook Share Button Twitter Share Button LinkedIn Share Button

1 Answer

0 votes

The usual method is to mark that kind of back-patched memory as "volatile const". And you probably also want to force volatile access of the data you are reading through and checking. Then the code should work as expected even for high optimisation levels.

It also seems unlikely that the compiler could deduce that the run-time fingerprint was never all zeros. gcc's optimisers are very impressive, but there is a limit to how much the compiler will pre-calculate. So I suspect there is another error of some kind in your code.

answer Jun 22, 2013 by anonymous
I believe the problem was duplicate symbols - one with global scope and one with local scope. *The library I'm working with is not well documented, so its not clear how to work through some steps).
Similar Questions
+2 votes

I am getting following error when compiling my program with gcc version 4.9.0

gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 4.9.0 20131023 (experimental)

Error

./A.out: /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6: version `CXXABI_1.3.8' not found (required by ./A.out)

But I gcc 4.7.3 is fine. Any guess why this may be happening.

+5 votes

GCC is stripping the object file when nothing from the file is being used anywhere in the executable (even -o0 does nor help). We have to disable this feature of linker g++. could any one please help us to resolve this issue??

+1 vote

If I compile c++ code, I am supposed to use g++. This automatically does some magic that calling just Gcc would not do. The same with Fortran code and gfortran. So my question is which frontend should I use to link if I have object files from both c++ as well as Fortran, c, and maybe another language still?

–1 vote

I have a c++ shared object that I am compiling using the following command.
g++ -g -Wall -c -o cpplib.o cpplib.cpp

And I am creating the shared object using the following command.
g++ -shared -o libcpplib.so cpplib.o

(I am aware that I can do this one single command, these are two separate invocations because I had the project setup on eclipse and that's how eclipse cdt does it.).

My host runs a RedHat 6.x x86_64 OS.

The compilation fails with the following error.

$ g++ -g -Wall -fPIC -c -o cpplib.o cpplib.cpp
$ g++ -shared -fPIC -o libcpplib.so cpplib.o
/usr/bin/ld: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.4.7/libstdc++.a(ios_init.o): relocation R_X86_64_32 against `pthread_cancel' can not be used when making a shared object; recompile with -fPIC
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.4.7/libstdc++.a: could not read symbols: Bad value
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status

I am certain that I haven't used the 'pthread_cancel' function in my code. Please help me.

0 votes

This code compiles on MSVC but not on G++ :

template
class B
{
public:
 static void SomeMethod()
 {
 A::SomeMethod();
 }
};

class A
{
public:
 static void SomeMethod();
};

void test()
{
 B::SomeMethod();
}

The error with g++ is :

test.cpp: In static member function "static void B::SomeMethod()":
test.cpp:7:3: error: "A" has not been declared

Is there is a option to indicate to g++ to evaluate the template functions only when a specialization is called, and not before ?

...