Jakub Jelinek jakub@redhat.com
Thu Jul 14 09:59:00 GMT 2005

• Previous message (by thread): Paranoid NOP padding?
• Next message (by thread): Paranoid NOP padding?
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 10:21:12AM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Bernd Jendrissek <berndj@prism.co.za> writes:
> 
> > Sometimes, though, the CPU should *never* execute code in a "gap".
> > Think gaps between functions, for example.
> 
> The assembler allows you to specify a different fill pattern to be used as
> padding (the second argument of the .align directive).

Yes, GCC would need to be changed to do that in the function alignment
directives.
But linker inserts padding as well, when padding in code segment between
different input sections.  So it needs a binutils change as well.

	Jakub

---

• Previous message (by thread): Paranoid NOP padding?
• Next message (by thread): Paranoid NOP padding?
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

More information about the Binutils mailing list