On 23.01.2024 14:37, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 10:22:10AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 22.01.2024 19:17, Andrew Cooper wrote: >>> It is bad form to have inter-function fallthrough. It only functions right >>> now because alignment padding bytes are NOPs. >> >> But that's a requirement anyway in executable sections. > > Really? I was under the impression we wanted to replace the padding > nops with rets maybe, or even poison the padding with int3 or ud2.
Well, that would be a decision of ours. Which then imo can't be described as "only functions right now because ..." The assembler can't[1] use other than NOPs by default, as it can't know whether fall-through is intended. Jan [1] minus bugs - see e.g. https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commitdiff;h=d164359dbc14c8ae4c7a117d236f5b7de4af671a
