X-Authentication-Warning: ieva01.lanet.lv: pavenis owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 6 Jul 1999 21:58:01 +0300 (WET) From: Andris Pavenis To: Eli Zaretskii cc: salvador , djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com, Robert Hoehne Subject: Re: .align directives in libc.a In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Tue, 6 Jul 1999, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > On Tue, 6 Jul 1999, salvador wrote: > > > > The alignment pseudo-ops allow to define the value of the byte with > > > which to pad. Thus, ".p2align 3,0xcc" should pad to 8-byte boundary > > > with Int 3 instructions. > > > > > > But why is this a good idea? > > > > To trap jumps in this space. > > Can GCC be configured or told at run time which filler to use for > alignment? > > For that matter, can it be told to emit a smarter align directive, like > ".balign 16,0xcc,7"? > It's not so simple. Normally gcc (cc1, cc1plus) does not specify filler character (eg. .p2align 2) but we had to use .p2align 2,0 for .ehframe (or otherwise exception suppoer would break). That should be normally fixed in binutils but that can be done for DJGPP with development snapshots only which is not acceptable for ordinary user. If we specify filler in target related config. files we should make sure filler will be used only where needed. That would require much grepping gcc sources, and more likely modifications to cc1, cc1plus etc And perhaps also fixing newly introduced bugs. I would like to stay off these things Andris