Inline call_array for clearer stack traces.

No-one seems to understand that a crash in a random .so from call_array()
in the linker isn't a linker bug. They _seem_ to understand (or at least
claim to) when we explain that this is just the linker calling their ELF
constructors --- despite the fact that the caller of call_array() is
call_constructors().

One experiment we can try though is to inline call_array() to elide that
frame from the crash dumps. I do also wonder whether renaming
call_constructors() to call_elf_constructors() would help/hinder/make no
difference. For now I'm leaning toward "hinder" because I suspect most
people don't understand "ELF constructor" and C++ folks at least will
probably be influenced in a not wholly incorrect direction when they
hear "constructor" (whereas "ELF constructor" might mislead them back in
the direction of "strange linker magic, not my fault" again)...

(The reformatting is clang-format's decision, not mine.)

Test: treehugger
Change-Id: I65ab95ceb2e988fd053c48c66f51afba17ccfa61

1 files changed, 2 insertions, 5 deletions

diff --git a/linker/linker_soinfo.cpp b/linker/linker_soinfo.cpp
index f44cb1c4b..287e757a9 100644
--- a/linker/linker_soinfo.cpp
+++ b/linker/linker_soinfo.cpp
@@ -485,11 +485,8 @@ static void call_function(const char* function_name __unused,
 }
 
 template <typename F>
-static void call_array(const char* array_name __unused,
-                       F* functions,
-                       size_t count,
-                       bool reverse,
-                       const char* realpath) {
+static inline void call_array(const char* array_name __unused, F* functions, size_t count,
+                              bool reverse, const char* realpath) {
   if (functions == nullptr) {
     return;
   }