Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "section_flags".
Did you mean:
action_flags
2013 Apr 19
0
[LLVMdev] funny llvm bug
...t;> attributes to cover these additional pieces, namely "ax" and
>> @progbits.
>
> Extend the section attribute 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...
2013 Apr 19
4
[LLVMdev] funny llvm bug
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
2013 Apr 19
1
[LLVMdev] funny llvm bug
> 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....
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"...
2013 Apr 19
1
[LLVMdev] funny llvm bug
...namely "ax" and
>>> @progbits.
>>
>>
>> Extend the section attribute 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....
>
This sounds awful.
> so then
>
> void x(int i) __attributes__((section("mysection"), section_flags("aw"),
> section_type("@progbits")) ;
>
> or maybe extend the syntax of se...