This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: RFC Adding a section group flag of 0
- From: Andreas Schwab <schwab at suse dot de>
- To: Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com>
- Cc: "binutils\@sourceware.org" <binutils at sourceware dot org>, ruiu at google dot com, peter dot smith at linaro dot org, sguelton at redhat dot com
- Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2019 16:14:42 +0100
- Subject: Re: RFC Adding a section group flag of 0
- References: <24c0c8d8-44e6-ab81-bdfb-43af8b53323b@redhat.com>
On Jan 09 2019, Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com> wrote:
> Currently the ELF standard for section groups requires that the first word
> of data in the group section be a flag, with only certain values recognised:
>
> The following flags are currently defined:
> Figure 4-13: Section Group Flags
>
> Name Value
> GRP_COMDAT 0x1
> GRP_MASKOS 0x0ff00000
> GRP_MASKPROC 0xf0000000
>
> [...]
>
> I would like to propose adding a new value to this list. A value of 0.
The value of 0 just means the absence of flags, doesn't it?
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE 1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7
"And now for something completely different."