https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25521
--- Comment #9 from Jose E. Marchesi <jose.marchesi at oracle dot com> --- So I got feedback from the clang/llvm folks on this. As you can see in [1] they asked the WG14 reflectors about the footnote 135 in the C18 spec and their conclusion is that there is no normative objection to place `const volatile' variables in read-only sections, much like non-volatile consts. This matches my earlier impression (before I got pointed to that footnote) and since there is at least one target being impacted by this GCC/LLVM discrepancy (bpf-unknown-none) I intend to prepare a patch to change the place where GCC places the `const volatiles'. [1] https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/56468
