Terry sent a patch upstream to handle the noread attribute in 2014:
https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2014-04/msg00181.html
Having seen this patch I believe the approach taken here to use section
names to represent the noread attribute in assembly is inferior to
Terry's approach.
For the GCC implementation of either an attribute or compile option for
execute-only we should not use section names to represent the noread
attribute, since for instance that means it can not be combined with
-ffunction-sections, or any other option that sets section names for
functions.
I would like to rebase Terry's patch and make the necessary changes to
it, slightly different attribute name and so on, and use that instead of
this patch.
Would there be any objections to this?