https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22553
--- Comment #7 from john at buu dot ac.th --- Nick Clifton, Thank you. I am sorry I mixed in the section names with the directives. I suspect the section name thing uses unwritten or perhaps Red Hat in-house non-public rules, and I just need to compile things to assembly with each new version of the compiler toolchain to learn what to use, and I know how to do that. Convincing others to follow the unwritten rules will be hard, but at least now .largecomm exists and that's definitely a positive step and quite helpful. Thanks again! JGH __________________________ From: nickc at redhat dot com [sourceware-bugzi...@sourceware.org] Sent: Monday, January 8, 2018 4:41 PM To: John Gatewood Ham Subject: [Bug gas/22553] .largecomm, .lbss, .ldata, and .lrodata are still not documented after many, many years https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22553 --- Comment #6 from Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com> --- Hi John, I have checked in the patch to document the .largecomm directive. I do not think that .ldata, .lbss or .lrodata exists as assembler directives, so I do not plan on documenting these unless you can demonstrate a way to reproduce them. A scan of the x86 assembler sources indicates that there are still some other undocumented directives however: .code16gcc, .secrel32, .operand_check, .sse_check, .disallow_index_reg, and .allow_index_reg. So I will leave this PR open as a reminder that they ought to be documented one day. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You reported the bug. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils