Searched hist:fd118772593999c94e8aff13bd445ac3064f88ca (Results 1 – 2 of 2) sorted by relevance
| /optee_os/lib/libutils/ext/include/ |
| H A D | compiler.h | fd118772593999c94e8aff13bd445ac3064f88ca Mon Nov 12 14:36:42 UTC 2018 Jerome Forissier <jerome.forissier@linaro.org> core: force read-only flag on .rodata.* sections
This commit fixes a warning with GCC 8.2 that did not occur with GCC 6.2:
$ make out/arm-plat-vexpress/core/arch/arm/kernel/user_ta.o
CHK out/arm-plat-vexpress/conf.mk
CHK out/arm-plat-vexpress/include/generated/conf.h
CHK out/arm-plat-vexpress/core/include/generated/asm-defines.h
CC out/arm-plat-vexpress/core/arch/arm/kernel/user_ta.o
{standard input}: Assembler messages:
{standard input}:4087: Warning: setting incorrect section attributes for .rodata.__unpaged
The message is printed as the assembler processes this code fragment,
generated by the C compiler:
.section .rodata.__unpaged,"aw"
The older compiler (GCC 6.2) would generate instead:
.section .rodata.__unpaged,"a",%progbits
The problem with .rodata.__unpaged,"aw" is that the "w" (writeable) flag
is not consistent with the section name (.rodata.*), which by convention
is supposed to be read-only.
- The section name (".rodata.__unpaged") is given by our macro:
__rodata_unpaged.
- The "w" flag is added by GCC, not sure why exactly. One reason [1] is
when a relocatable binary is being generated and the structure contains
relocatable data. But, we are not explicitly asking for a relocatable
binary, so this might as well be a bug or counter-intuitive feature of
the compiler.
Anyway, to avoid the warning, we need to fix the section flags. The
section type (%progbits) is optional, it is deduced from the section name
by default. %progbits indicates that the section contains data (i.e., is
not empty).
Link: [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-05/msg01016.html
Signed-off-by: Jerome Forissier <jerome.forissier@linaro.org>
Tested-by: Jerome Forissier <jerome.forissier@linaro.org> (QEMU)
Tested-by: Jerome Forissier <jerome.forissier@linaro.org> (HiKey960)
Acked-by: Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@linaro.org>
Acked-by: Etienne Carriere <etienne.carriere@linaro.org>
|
| /optee_os/core/include/kernel/ |
| H A D | dt.h | fd118772593999c94e8aff13bd445ac3064f88ca Mon Nov 12 14:36:42 UTC 2018 Jerome Forissier <jerome.forissier@linaro.org> core: force read-only flag on .rodata.* sections
This commit fixes a warning with GCC 8.2 that did not occur with GCC 6.2:
$ make out/arm-plat-vexpress/core/arch/arm/kernel/user_ta.o
CHK out/arm-plat-vexpress/conf.mk
CHK out/arm-plat-vexpress/include/generated/conf.h
CHK out/arm-plat-vexpress/core/include/generated/asm-defines.h
CC out/arm-plat-vexpress/core/arch/arm/kernel/user_ta.o
{standard input}: Assembler messages:
{standard input}:4087: Warning: setting incorrect section attributes for .rodata.__unpaged
The message is printed as the assembler processes this code fragment,
generated by the C compiler:
.section .rodata.__unpaged,"aw"
The older compiler (GCC 6.2) would generate instead:
.section .rodata.__unpaged,"a",%progbits
The problem with .rodata.__unpaged,"aw" is that the "w" (writeable) flag
is not consistent with the section name (.rodata.*), which by convention
is supposed to be read-only.
- The section name (".rodata.__unpaged") is given by our macro:
__rodata_unpaged.
- The "w" flag is added by GCC, not sure why exactly. One reason [1] is
when a relocatable binary is being generated and the structure contains
relocatable data. But, we are not explicitly asking for a relocatable
binary, so this might as well be a bug or counter-intuitive feature of
the compiler.
Anyway, to avoid the warning, we need to fix the section flags. The
section type (%progbits) is optional, it is deduced from the section name
by default. %progbits indicates that the section contains data (i.e., is
not empty).
Link: [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-05/msg01016.html
Signed-off-by: Jerome Forissier <jerome.forissier@linaro.org>
Tested-by: Jerome Forissier <jerome.forissier@linaro.org> (QEMU)
Tested-by: Jerome Forissier <jerome.forissier@linaro.org> (HiKey960)
Acked-by: Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@linaro.org>
Acked-by: Etienne Carriere <etienne.carriere@linaro.org>
|