search for: mysect

...;m going to file this bug but it's kind of a blocker for me so maybe someone has time to look at it. Should be nearly trivial to fix. It's a bug in the way the "section" attribute of functions is processed. Consider the following code: void x(int i) __attribute((section(".mySection,\"aw\", at progbits#"))); void x(int i) { } If you compile this with gcc you get: .file "sectbug.c" .section .mySection,"aw", at progbits#,"ax", at progbits .globl x With Clang you get .file "sectbug.c"...

...tribute to allow additional parameters? > > Joerg > The idea would be to create additional function attributes. I have not spent time thinking this through yet. section_flags("flags") section_type("type") others.... so then void x(int i) __attributes__((section("mysection"), section_flags("aw"), section_type("@progbits")) ; or maybe extend the syntax of section section(<name> [<section_flags>] [,<type>])

On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 09:47:28AM -0700, reed kotler wrote: > The clean solution is probably to add two additional function > attributes to cover these additional pieces, namely "ax" and > @progbits. Extend the section attribute to allow additional parameters? Joerg

..."abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz" "ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ") == name.npos) { OS << "\t.section\t" << name; } else { OS << "\t.section\t\""; As section "name" is something like .mySection,\"aw\", at progbits# , this method puts all the string in quotes. Other targets (COFF and MachO) doesn't have such treatment. If looks like the code that transforms section names should be removed. Does anybody know what this transformation is for? 2013/4/19 Joerg Sonnenberger &l...

...tributes. > I have not spent time thinking this through yet. > > section_flags("flags") > section_type("type") > others.... What would the semantic be of having section_flags but no section name? > so then > > void x(int i) __attributes__((section("mysection"), section_flags("aw"), > section_type("@progbits")) ; > > or maybe extend the syntax of section > > section(<name> [<section_flags>] [,<type>]) This avoids the above mentioned problem, so it is probably better. Cheers, Rafael

...e idea would be to create additional function attributes. > I have not spent time thinking this through yet. > > section_flags("flags") > section_type("type") > others.... > This sounds awful. > so then > > void x(int i) __attributes__((section("mysection"), section_flags("aw"), > section_type("@progbits")) ; > > or maybe extend the syntax of section > > section(<name> [<section_flags>] [,<type>]) > This not so much. -eric

Hi, I can't find a way to let users defined in a specific section to use a given timezone. Am missing something obvious ? voicemail.conf: [general] tz=paris24 envelope=on [zonemessages] paris24=Europe/Paris|'vm-received' q 'digits/at' R [mysection] 7530 => 1234,foo at example.com,,attach=yes|tz=paris24 7531 => 1234,foo at example.com,,attach=yes When 7530 is listening to its voicemail, paris24 options are used. When 7531 is listening, some other default options are used (not paris24 options). Any idea ? Regards -------------- ne...

...mnopqrstuvwxyz" > "ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ") == name.npos) { > OS << "\t.section\t" << name; > } else { > OS << "\t.section\t\""; > > As section "name" is something like .mySection,\"aw\", at progbits# , > this method puts all the string in quotes. > Other targets (COFF and MachO) doesn't have such treatment. > > If looks like the code that transforms section names should be > removed. Does anybody know what this transformation is for? It is...

I recently examined a bug in a program, and it turned out that the customer was using the section attribute as a form of inline-assembly mechanism, with something like: __attribute__((section("sectionName\nasm\nasm\nasm"))) this was really ugly and not at all obvious where the problem originated. Is there any way of getting LLVM or CLang to validate the name used in the section

On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 06:57:29PM -0700, reed kotler wrote: > I'm going to file this bug but it's kind of a blocker for me so > maybe someone has time > to look at it. Should be nearly trivial to fix. I don't think this is a bug, but a misfeature in GCC due to the way it does (non-)escaping. Joerg

...evelopers" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 12:06:51 PM > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Using '__attribute__((section("name")))' for inline assembly injection > > > > People also try to use > __attribute__((section(".mysection,\"rwx\", at progbits"))) to get > executable code sections for toy experiments in self-modifying code, > but we don't support that either. Basically, we take the section > name and always quote it, unlike GCC, and I don't think we want to > change that. Normall...