Timeline for What is the "Fallthrough" option in Ghidra for?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 5 at 15:38 | comment | added | Yotamz |
Ghidra's Instruction objects implement the hasFallthrough method. Maybe this is what you are looking for: ghidra.re/ghidra_docs/api/ghidra/program/model/listing/…
|
|
| Aug 5 at 15:28 | comment | added | Yotamz | So the "opposite of fallthrough" you are referring to are two different cases: 1. jumps/calls to subroutines are simple instructions, regardless of whether Ghidra's decompiler can accurately predict their target or not. 2. instructions that generate interrupts, these will jump to an interrupt handler, you can say that the latter have no fallthrough. | |
| Aug 4 at 15:17 | comment | added | hippietrail | In fact here's a perfect example of "the opposite of fallthrough" confusing Ghidra users in another recent question right here. | |
| Aug 3 at 18:29 | comment | added | hippietrail | I mean in cases like branch to subroutines or traps that are documented to never return. | |
| Aug 3 at 17:25 | comment | added | Yotamz | Fallthrough is the next instruction when not branching. The opposite would be the branch target, which can be a literal value, a register with or without an offset and etc. If Ghidra finds the target - it will be shown, sometimes it can be trickier. | |
| Aug 2 at 22:27 | comment | added | hippietrail | Is there also the opposite so we can mark places that we know don't continue execution as they normally would? | |
| Jul 2 at 23:20 | history | answered | Yotamz | CC BY-SA 4.0 |