Re: [PATCH] pop previous section in alternative.c

[Steven Rostedt]

On Thu, 10 Apr 2008, H. Peter Anvin wrote:

> Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > That would mark gcc itself as buggy, because gcc will move some things
> > into the #APP/#NO_APP thing, and sometimes doesn't end the #APP at all!
> >
>
> That is quite buggy indeed, since the whole #APP and #NO_APP string set
> are arbitrary strings that are part of the gcc configuration, marked as
> "what to insert before user assembly" and "what to insert after user
> assembly."  They are not guaranteed to be simple comments, in fact.
>
> In fact, gas *is* sensitive to #APP ... #NO_APP, so they are not simple
> comments.

Looking at the output below, shows that testing .sections in between
#APP and #NO_APP would in fact catch this bug.

-- Steve

.Ltext0:
#APP
                .section .rodata, "a"
intelnops: .byte 0x90
.byte 0x89,0xf6
.byte 0x8d,0x76,0x00
.byte 0x8d,0x74,0x26,0x00
.byte 0x90
.byte 0x8d,0x74,0x26,0x00
.byte 0x8d,0xb6,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00
.byte 0x8d,0xb4,0x26,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00
.byte 0x90
.byte 0x8d,0xb4,0x26,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00

                .section .rodata, "a"
k8nops: .byte 0x90
.byte 0x66,0x90
.byte 0x66,0x66,0x90
.byte 0x66,0x66,0x66,0x90
.byte 0x66,0x66,0x90
.byte 0x66,0x90
.byte 0x66,0x66,0x90
.byte 0x66,0x66,0x90
.byte 0x66,0x66,0x66,0x90
.byte 0x66,0x66,0x90
.byte 0x66,0x66,0x66,0x90
.byte 0x66,0x66,0x66,0x90

                .section .rodata, "a"
k7nops: .byte 0x90
.byte 0x8b,0xc0
.byte 0x8d,0x04,0x20
.byte 0x8d,0x44,0x20,0x00
.byte 0x8d,0x44,0x20,0x00
.byte 0x90
.byte 0x8d,0x80,0,0,0,0
.byte 0x8D,0x04,0x05,0,0,0,0
.byte 0x8D,0x04,0x05,0,0,0,0
.byte 0x90

                .section .rodata, "a"
p6nops: .byte 0x90
.byte 0x66,0x90
.byte 0x0f,0x1f,0x00
.byte 0x0f,0x1f,0x40,0
.byte 0x0f,0x1f,0x44,0x00,0
.byte 0x66,0x0f,0x1f,0x44,0x00,0
.byte 0x0f,0x1f,0x80,0,0,0,0
.byte 0x0f,0x1f,0x84,0x00,0,0,0,0

#NO_APP
        .type   constant_test_bit, @function
constant_test_bit:
.LFB30:

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/