This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [PATCH] ARM: Add support for SHF_ARM_NOREAD section flag
- From: Andre Vieira <Andre dot SimoesDiasVieira at foss dot arm dot com>
- To: binutils at sourceware dot org
- Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 18:33:23 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: Add support for SHF_ARM_NOREAD section flag
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <5671884D dot 70702 at st dot com> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1512161815480 dot 15602 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <5673F93D dot 5080501 at st dot com> <56795B20 dot 8070802 at redhat dot com>
Hi Nick, Mickael
On 22/12/15 14:16, Nick Clifton wrote:
After a quick look inside readelf.c it seems there are the standard
output selected with -S option and a detailed one selected with -N
Do you want me to add ARM-specific section flags for detailed output
only ? or for both ?
Support for -N is sufficient. The output with -S (the 'p' flag) is
perfectly OK already.
To save you some time I have gone ahead and made the change to readelf,
and checked your patch in.
One minor point - the ChangeLog for patches to the include/elf directory
is in the include/elf directory itself and not in the include directory
Sorry for the late response, it was a very busy period with our
toolchain release and Christmas.
Terry sent a patch upstream to handle the noread attribute in 2014:
Having seen this patch I believe the approach taken here to use section
names to represent the noread attribute in assembly is inferior to
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
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
Would there be any objections to this?