How does .rodata occupy ROM space? [closed] - c++

Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 12 months ago.
Improve this question
I'm using esp32c3(a riscv architecture chip). I use a global string array initialized with string, and it occupies ram and rom. When I add "const" keyword before the array, the array is put into .rodata by link script. Then I found that the ram consumption reduces(this is in line with my expectation). However, the compiled .bin firmware file size is reduced.
I think even if the const keyword is added to the array, the size of the compiled .bin firmware file should remain unchanged, because the strings are always need to be stored in the firmware.This puzzles me.
Other info:
If a pointer is used to point to the same string content(instead of using string array, and the pointer is is located at .sdata), the .bin file size will increase, ram consumption not increase.
At the same time, I saw this paragraph in the official data of the chip, but I didn't fully understand the meaning:
By default, constant data is placed by the linker into a region mapped to the MMU flash cache. This is the same as the IROM (code executed from flash) section, but is for read-only data not executable code.
The only constant data not placed into this memory type by default are literal constants which are embedded by the compiler into application code. These are placed as the surrounding function’s executable instructions.

You don't specify it in your question, but I'm assuming your array is initialized with some non-zero data.
Your typical executable will look something like this [source]:
When you add the const keyword, the array simply gets moved from the .data section into the .rodata. The net change in file size is 0.
If you also add static keyword to your array, it will be moved into the .text section, but again, the size will remain the same.
See Wikipedia page on Data segment for the information about each section.

If I get you correct, you expect the following to happen when you add const to your array:
the RAM consumption is reduced
the ROM consumption is increased.
But you can only observe 1), not 2).
Without looking at the exact sections that are used, you are missing one thing:
If you have an array like this:
char myArray[] = "This is the String for my Array!";
Then you need 2 chunks of memory:
RAM area for holding your array
ROM area for holding the string literal you are using to initialized that array.
At startup the initialization string is copied from ROM to RAM area.
If you make the array const, there is no more need to copy the string into RAM and you will see RAM consumption drop.
But wrt ROM consumption, there is no big difference as the data is already there.
Therefore ROM area will not be reduced.

The usual reason is that at the OS level memory gets allocated in fixed sized chunks for reasons owing to the hardware in use, if you add an object to .rodata that doesn't cross a boundary of that size then no more memory will need to be allocated than if that object were not part of the program. I can't tell you anything about the embedded platform you are using but for x86 for example that fixed size will be either 4kb, 2mb or 4mb (that is, the page size).

Related

PE: Adding code at the end of .txt section

As I understand in PE file Virtual Size shows how much space it allocates for section during loading and Raw Size shows how big the section is on disk.
I came across to this executable which did the following:
It subtracted the virtual size (offset 0x8) from the raw data size (offset 0x10) and made sure there was some space(for example 100 bytes). At offset 0x14 from the text section header it found the offset in the file for the section itself. It added to this the virtual size, finding right where the section ends in the file. it copied some shellcode(which at the end eventually jumped to the original entry point of an executable to make sure original executable ran) to the end of the text section of the binary.
Now I'm little confused here, if the Virtual Size shows the exact space which will be allocated for executable, would not adding code at the end of .txt section overwrite some other data of executable and make it crash? thanks.
This is a great question and illustrates a very important point (or you might say quirk) about how the Windows loader calculates memory sizes.
The PE/COFF spec does indeed describe VirtualSize as "The total size of the section when loaded into memory". This is technically true if you consider total to be the total amount of REAL data that comprises the section, but it is not the total amount of memory Windows allocates for the section. You'll find VirtualSize is often LESS than the amount Windows allocates for the section in memory because VirtualSize must be rounded UP to the nearest memory alignment value (set in the PE image).
In other words, VirtualSize represents the unrounded size of the section while SizeOfRawData is the size of the data in the image file, but rounded up to the nearest file alignment padding value. This is the reason VirtualSize is the better representation of the true "raw" size of the data, in memory or on disk. The PE/COFF spec does not make this distinction. Why one is rounded in the image file and not the other probably has its ancient roots in backwards compatibility.
This is precisely why your shellcode uses VirtualSize to find the "real" end of data even as it resides in the image file. Not surprisingly, you can calculate SizeOfRawData by rounding VirtualSize up to the file alignment's value, at least in well formed PE files.
The shellcode simply used VirtualSize to find the end of the REAL code. Between there and SizeOfRawData bytes, are just unused padding zeroes, making it a prime spot to add new code without affecting the size of the file or breaking addressing offsets within the PE file.
In summary, the Windows loader essentially takes the VirtualSize value and rounds it up to the memory alignment value to get the real size of the memory allocation (and even this may be rounded up to the nearest 4k-minimum memory page). Then up to SizeOfRawData bytes are copied from the file to the beginning of the memory section. If it is less than the size of the section in memory, the remainder is zero filled.
Uhmmm, this hack code seems crafted to hide malicious code between sections.
Going to your question, you are correct VirtualSize is the space really allocated in memory and RawSize is the the space used on disk to hold the section data.
What you missed is (from MS PECOFF spec):
VirtualSize: The total size of the section when loaded into memory. If this value is greater than SizeOfRawData, the section is zero-padded. This field is valid only for executable images and should be set to zero for object files.
This means that if a the result of SizeOfRawData-VirtualSize is positive we have some space available on disk actually filled with 0's.
If that space is enough to hold the malicious code then adding the start of text section on disk with the VirtualSize you can get the start of 0's padded area that can be used to copy the code.
The rest is story...

What does "Memory allocated at compile time" really mean?

In programming languages like C and C++, people often refer to static and dynamic memory allocation. I understand the concept but the phrase "All memory was allocated (reserved) during compile time" always confuses me.
Compilation, as I understand it, converts high level C/C++ code to machine language and outputs an executable file. How is memory "allocated" in a compiled file ? Isn't memory always allocated in the RAM with all the virtual memory management stuff ?
Isn't memory allocation by definition a runtime concept ?
If I make a 1KB statically allocated variable in my C/C++ code, will that increase the size of the executable by the same amount ?
This is one of the pages where the phrase is used under the heading "Static allocation".
Back To Basics: Memory allocation, a walk down the history
Memory allocated at compile-time means the compiler resolves at compile-time where certain things will be allocated inside the process memory map.
For example, consider a global array:
int array[100];
The compiler knows at compile-time the size of the array and the size of an int, so it knows the entire size of the array at compile-time. Also a global variable has static storage duration by default: it is allocated in the static memory area of the process memory space (.data/.bss section). Given that information, the compiler decides during compilation in what address of that static memory area the array will be.
Of course that memory addresses are virtual addresses. The program assumes that it has its own entire memory space (From 0x00000000 to 0xFFFFFFFF for example). That's why the compiler could do assumptions like "Okay, the array will be at address 0x00A33211". At runtime that addresses are translated to real/hardware addresses by the MMU and OS.
Value initialized static storage things are a bit different. For example:
int array[] = { 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 };
In our first example, the compiler only decided where the array will be allocated, storing that information in the executable.
In the case of value-initialized things, the compiler also injects the initial value of the array into the executable, and adds code which tells the program loader that after the array allocation at program start, the array should be filled with these values.
Here are two examples of the assembly generated by the compiler (GCC4.8.1 with x86 target):
C++ code:
int a[4];
int b[] = { 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 };
int main()
{}
Output assembly:
a:
.zero 16
b:
.long 1
.long 2
.long 3
.long 4
main:
pushq %rbp
movq %rsp, %rbp
movl $0, %eax
popq %rbp
ret
As you can see, the values are directly injected into the assembly. In the array a, the compiler generates a zero initialization of 16 bytes, because the Standard says that static stored things should be initialized to zero by default:
8.5.9 (Initializers) [Note]:
Every object of static storage duration is zero-initialized at
program startup before any other initial- ization takes place. In some
cases, additional initialization is done later.
I always suggest people to disassembly their code to see what the compiler really does with the C++ code. This applies from storage classes/duration (like this question) to advanced compiler optimizations. You could instruct your compiler to generate the assembly, but there are wonderful tools to do this on the Internet in a friendly manner. My favourite is GCC Explorer.
Memory allocated at compile time simply means there will be no further allocation at run time -- no calls to malloc, new, or other dynamic allocation methods. You'll have a fixed amount of memory usage even if you don't need all of that memory all of the time.
Isn't memory allocation by definition a runtime concept?
The memory is not in use prior to run time, but immediately prior to execution starting its allocation is handled by the system.
If I make a 1KB statically allocated variable in my C/C++ code, will that increase the size of the executable by the same amount?
Simply declaring the static will not increase the size of your executable more than a few bytes. Declaring it with an initial value that is non-zero will (in order to hold that initial value). Rather, the linker simply adds this 1KB amount to the memory requirement that the system's loader creates for you immediately prior to execution.
Memory allocated in compile time means that when you load the program, some part of the memory will be immediately allocated and the size and (relative) position of this allocation is determined at compile time.
char a[32];
char b;
char c;
Those 3 variables are "allocated at compile time", it means that the compiler calculates their size (which is fixed) at compile time. The variable a will be an offset in memory, let's say, pointing to address 0, b will point at address 33 and c at 34 (supposing no alignment optimization). So, allocating 1Kb of static data will not increase the size of your code, since it will just change an offset inside it. The actual space will be allocated at load time.
Real memory allocation always happens in run time, because the kernel needs to keep track of it and to update its internal data structures (how much memory is allocated for each process, pages and so on). The difference is that the compiler already knows the size of each data you are going to use and this is allocated as soon as your program is executed.
Remember also that we are talking about relative addresses. The real address where the variable will be located will be different. At load time the kernel will reserve some memory for the process, lets say at address x, and all the hard coded addresses contained in the executable file will be incremented by x bytes, so that variable a in the example will be at address x, b at address x+33 and so on.
Adding variables on the stack that take up N bytes doesn't (necessarily) increase the bin's size by N bytes. It will, in fact, add but a few bytes most of the time.
Let's start off with an example of how adding a 1000 chars to your code will increase the bin's size in a linear fashion.
If the 1k is a string, of a thousand chars, which is declared like so
const char *c_string = "Here goes a thousand chars...999";//implicit \0 at end
and you then were to vim your_compiled_bin, you'd actually be able to see that string in the bin somewhere. In that case, yes: the executable will be 1 k bigger, because it contains the string in full.
If, however you allocate an array of ints, chars or longs on the stack and assign it in a loop, something along these lines
int big_arr[1000];
for (int i=0;i<1000;++i) big_arr[i] = some_computation_func(i);
then, no: it won't increase the bin... by 1000*sizeof(int)
Allocation at compile time means what you've now come to understand it means (based on your comments): the compiled bin contains information the system requires to know how much memory what function/block will need when it gets executed, along with information on the stack size your application requires. That's what the system will allocate when it executes your bin, and your program becomes a process (well, the executing of your bin is the process that... well, you get what I'm saying).
Of course, I'm not painting the full picture here: The bin contains information about how big a stack the bin will actually be needing. Based on this information (among other things), the system will reserve a chunk of memory, called the stack, that the program gets sort of free reign over. Stack memory still is allocated by the system, when the process (the result of your bin being executed) is initiated. The process then manages the stack memory for you. When a function or loop (any type of block) is invoked/gets executed, the variables local to that block are pushed to the stack, and they are removed (the stack memory is "freed" so to speak) to be used by other functions/blocks. So declaring int some_array[100] will only add a few bytes of additional information to the bin, that tells the system that function X will be requiring 100*sizeof(int) + some book-keeping space extra.
On many platforms, all of the global or static allocations within each module will be consolidated by the compiler into three or fewer consolidated allocations (one for uninitialized data (often called "bss"), one for initialized writable data (often called "data"), and one for constant data ("const")), and all of the global or static allocations of each type within a program will be consolidated by the linker into one global for each type. For example, assuming int is four bytes, a module has the following as its only static allocations:
int a;
const int b[6] = {1,2,3,4,5,6};
char c[200];
const int d = 23;
int e[4] = {1,2,3,4};
int f;
it would tell the linker that it needed 208 bytes for bss, 16 bytes for "data", and 28 bytes for "const". Further, any reference to a variable would be replaced with an area selector and offset, so a, b, c, d, and e, would be replaced by bss+0, const+0, bss+4, const+24, data+0, or bss+204, respectively.
When a program is linked, all of the bss areas from all the modules are be concatenated together; likewise the data and const areas. For each module, the address of any bss-relative variables will be increased by the size of all preceding modules' bss areas (again, likewise with data and const). Thus, when the linker is done, any program will have one bss allocation, one data allocation, and one const allocation.
When a program is loaded, one of four things will generally happen depending upon the platform:
The executable will indicate how many bytes it needs for each kind of data and--for the initialized data area, where the initial contents may be found. It will also include a list of all the instructions which use a bss-, data-, or const- relative address. The operating system or loader will allocate the appropriate amount of space for each area and then add the starting address of that area to each instruction which needs it.
The operating system will allocate a chunk of memory to hold all three kinds of data, and give the application a pointer to that chunk of memory. Any code which uses static or global data will dereference it relative to that pointer (in many cases, the pointer will be stored in a register for the lifetime of an application).
The operating system will initially not allocate any memory to the application, except for what holds its binary code, but the first thing the application does will be to request a suitable allocation from the operating system, which it will forevermore keep in a register.
The operating system will initially not allocate space for the application, but the application will request a suitable allocation on startup (as above). The application will include a list of instructions with addresses that need to be updated to reflect where memory was allocated (as with the first style), but rather than having the application patched by the OS loader, the application will include enough code to patch itself.
All four approaches have advantages and disadvantages. In every case, however, the compiler will consolidate an arbitrary number of static variables into a fixed small number of memory requests, and the linker will consolidate all of those into a small number of consolidated allocations. Even though an application will have to receive a chunk of memory from the operating system or loader, it is the compiler and linker which are responsible for allocating individual pieces out of that big chunk to all the individual variables that need it.
The core of your question is this: "How is memory "allocated" in a compiled file? Isn't memory always allocated in the RAM with all the virtual memory management stuff? Isn't memory allocation by definition a runtime concept?"
I think the problem is that there are two different concepts involved in memory allocation. At its basic, memory allocation is the process by which we say "this item of data is stored in this specific chunk of memory". In a modern computer system, this involves a two step process:
Some system is used to decide the virtual address at which the item will be stored
The virtual address is mapped to a physical address
The latter process is purely run time, but the former can be done at compile time, if the data have a known size and a fixed number of them is required. Here's basically how it works:
The compiler sees a source file containing a line that looks a bit like this:
int c;
It produces output for the assembler that instructs it to reserve memory for the variable 'c'. This might look like this:
global _c
section .bss
_c: resb 4
When the assembler runs, it keeps a counter that tracks offsets of each item from the start of a memory 'segment' (or 'section'). This is like the parts of a very large 'struct' that contains everything in the entire file it doesn't have any actual memory allocated to it at this time, and could be anywhere. It notes in a table that _c has a particular offset (say 510 bytes from the start of the segment) and then increments its counter by 4, so the next such variable will be at (e.g.) 514 bytes. For any code that needs the address of _c, it just puts 510 in the output file, and adds a note that the output needs the address of the segment that contains _c adding to it later.
The linker takes all of the assembler's output files, and examines them. It determines an address for each segment so that they won't overlap, and adds the offsets necessary so that instructions still refer to the correct data items. In the case of uninitialized memory like that occupied by c (the assembler was told that the memory would be uninitialized by the fact that the compiler put it in the '.bss' segment, which is a name reserved for uninitialized memory), it includes a header field in its output that tells the operating system how much needs to be reserved. It may be relocated (and usually is) but is usually designed to be loaded more efficiently at one particular memory address, and the OS will try to load it at this address. At this point, we have a pretty good idea what the virtual address is that will be used by c.
The physical address will not actually be determined until the program is running. However, from the programmer's perspective the physical address is actually irrelevant—we'll never even find out what it is, because the OS doesn't usually bother telling anyone, it can change frequently (even while the program is running), and a main purpose of the OS is to abstract this away anyway.
An executable describes what space to allocate for static variables. This allocation is done by the system, when you run the executable. So your 1kB static variable won't increase the size of the executable with 1kB:
static char[1024];
Unless of course you specify an initializer:
static char[1024] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, ... };
So, in addition to 'machine language' (i.e. CPU instructions), an executable contains a description of the required memory layout.
Memory can be allocated in many ways:
in application heap (whole heap is allocated for your app by OS when the program starts)
in operating system heap (so you can grab more and more)
in garbage collector controlled heap (same as both above)
on stack (so you can get a stack overflow)
reserved in code/data segment of your binary (executable)
in remote place (file, network - and you receive a handle not a pointer to that memory)
Now your question is what is "memory allocated at compile time". Definitely it is just an incorrectly phrased saying, which is supposed to refer to either binary segment allocation or stack allocation, or in some cases even to a heap allocation, but in that case the allocation is hidden from programmer eyes by invisible constructor call. Or probably the person who said that just wanted to say that memory is not allocated on heap, but did not know about stack or segment allocations.(Or did not want to go into that kind of detail).
But in most cases person just wants to say that the amount of memory being allocated is known at compile time.
The binary size will only change when the memory is reserved in the code or data segment of your app.
You are right. Memory is actually allocated (paged) at load time, i.e. when the executable file is brought into (virtual) memory. Memory can also be initialized on that moment. The compiler just creates a memory map. [By the way, stack and heap spaces are also allocated at load time !]
I think you need to step back a bit. Memory allocated at compile time.... What can that mean? Can it mean that memory on chips that have not yet been manufactured, for computers that have not yet been designed, is somehow being reserved? No. No, time travel, no compilers that can manipulate the universe.
So, it must mean that the compiler generates instructions to allocate that memory somehow at runtime. But if you look at it in from the right angle, the compiler generates all instructions, so what can be the difference. The difference is that the compiler decides, and at runtime, your code can not change or modify its decisions. If it decided it needed 50 bytes at compile time, at runtime, you can't make it decide to allocate 60 -- that decision has already been made.
If you learn assembly programming, you will see that you have to carve out segments for the data, the stack, and code, etc. The data segment is where your strings and numbers live. The code segment is where your code lives. These segments are built into the executable program. Of course the stack size is important as well... you wouldn't want a stack overflow!
So if your data segment is 500 bytes, your program has a 500 byte area. If you change the data segment to 1500 bytes, the size of the program will be 1000 bytes larger. The data is assembled into the actual program.
This is what is going on when you compile higher level languages. The actual data area is allocated when it is compiled into an executable program, increasing the size of the program. The program can request memory on the fly, as well, and this is dynamic memory. You can request memory from the RAM and the CPU will give it to you to use, you can let go of it, and your garbage collector will release it back to the CPU. It can even be swapped to a hard disk, if necessary, by a good memory manager. These features are what high level languages provide you.
I would like to explain these concepts with the help of few diagrams.
This is true that memory cannot be allocated at compile time, for sure.
But, then what happens in fact at compile time.
Here comes the explanation.
Say, for example a program has four variables x,y,z and k.
Now, at compile time it simply makes a memory map, where the location of these variables with respect to each other is ascertained.
This diagram will illustrate it better.
Now imagine, no program is running in memory.
This I show by a big empty rectangle.
Next, the first instance of this program is executed.
You can visualize it as follows.
This is the time when actually memory is allocated.
When second instance of this program is running, the memory would look like as follows.
And the third ..
So on and so forth.
I hope this visualization explains this concept well.
There is very nice explanation given in the accepted answer. Just in case i will post the link which i have found useful.
https://www.tenouk.com/ModuleW.html
One among the many thing what a compiler does is that create and maintain a SYMTAB(Symbol Table under the section.symtab). This will be purely created and maintained by compilers using any Data Structure(List, Trees...etc) and not for the developers eyes. Any access request made by the developers this is where it will hit first.
Now about the Symbol Table,
We only need to know about the two columns Symbol Name and the Offset.
Symbol Name column will have the variable names and the offset column will have the offset value.
Lets see this with an example:
int a , b , c ;
Now we all know that the register Stack_Pointer(sp) points to the Top of the Stack Memory. Let that be sp = 1000.
Now the Symbol Name column will have three values in it a then b and then c. Reminding you all that variable a will be at the top of the stack memory.
So a's equivalent offset value will be 0.
(Compile Time Offset_Value)
Then b and its equivalent offset value will be 1. (Compile Time Offset_Value)
Then c and its equivalent offset value will be 2. (Compile Time Offset_Value)
Now calculating a's Physical address (or) Runtime Memory Address = (sp + offset_value of a)
= (1000 + 0) = 1000
Now calculating b's Physical address (or) Runtime Memory Address = (sp - offset_value of b)
= (1000 - 1) = 996
Now calculating c's Physical address (or) Runtime Memory Address = (sp - offset_value of c)
= (1000 - 2) = 992
Therefore at the time of the compilation we will only be having the offset values and only during the runtime the actual physical addresses are calculated.
Note:
Stack_Pointer value will be assigned only after the program is loaded. Pointer Arithmetic happens between the Stack_Pointer register and the variables offset to calculate the variables Physical Address.
"POINTERS AND POINTER ARITHMETIC, WAY OF THE PROGRAMMING WORLD"
Share what I learned about this question.
You can understand this issue in two steps:
First, the compilation step: the compiler generates the binary. In Linux system, binary is a file in ELF (Executable and Linkable Format) format. ELF file contains several sections, including .bss and .data
.data
Initialized data, with read/write access rights
.bss
Uninitialized data, with read/write access rights (=WA)
.data and .bss just map to the segments of process's memory layout, which contains static variables.
second, the loading step. When the binary file get executed, the ELF file will be loaded into process's memory. The loader can find static variables' information from ELF file.
Simply speaking, the compiler and the loader follow the same standard to communicate with each other, and the standard is ELF format.

how are the memory cells organized on a RAM and how is it related to C++? [closed]

Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
As far as I can understand, RAM is organized like a net of rows and columns of cells, each cell containing 1 byte. Also, each cell is label with an address memory written in hexadecimal system. Is this so? Now, when running a c++ program, I suppose it uses the RAM as a mean of storage. In this case, as the char type on c++ is the basic unit of storage, is this size of a char exactly the same as the cell (1 byte)?, does the size of a char depends on the size of a cell (in case the size of a cell is not 1 byte)?, does it depend on the compiler? Thank you so much.
It is easy to visualize RAM as a net of rows and columns. This is how most CS classes teach students as well and for most purposes this would do well at a conceptual level.
One thing you must know while writing C++ programs is the concept of 2 different memories: stack and heap. Stack is memory that stores variables when they come in scope. When they go out of scope, they are removed. Think of this as a stack implementation (FIFO).
Now, heap memory is slightly more complicated. This does not have anything to do with scope of the variable. You can set a fixed memory location to contain a particular value and it will stay there until you free it up. You can set the heap memory by using the 'new' keyword.
For instance: int* abc = new int(2);
This means that the pointer abc points to a heap location with the value '2'. You must explicitly free the memory using the delete keyword once you are done with this memory. Failure to do so would cause memory leaks.
In C, the type of a character constant like a is actually an int, with size of 4. In C++, the type is char, with size of 1. The size is NOT dependent on compiler. The size of int, float and the like are dependent on the configuration of your system (16/32/64-bit). Use the statement:
int a=5;
cout<<sizeof(a)<<endl;
to determine the size of int in your system.

How is a program loaded in ROM?

When you run a program on windows, it is loaded into computer memory organized as:
Data Segment
Stack
Code segment
The data segment may contain data which is read only or has read and write access.
E.g:
char *c = "Hello World";
The string Hello World is said to be stored in read only section of memory. Is it stored in physical memory which is sometimes called RAM or is it stored in ROM which is read only? How can it be written if it is read only?
A PC has only one area of memory that really qualifies as ROM, and that is where the BIOS is stored. All of Windows and the programs loaded in Windows will be in RAM.
The x86 processor memory management is able to mark blocks of memory as read only, but the linker and OS have to work together to enable this. It happens after the program is loaded into memory.
It is stored in RAM. The Operating System, in cooperation with the processor itself, is able to protect regions of memory so that any attempt to write to them from user code causes an exception.
In many embedded systems, they have RAM and some type of Read Only Memory, often times called Flash (it can be programmed multiple times without being removed from the Printed Circuit Board).
Simple embedded applications place the executable and read-only data sections in Flash and execute out of Flash. The read/write variables are placed into RAM. Let us consider this model for your example code fragment:
char * c = "Hello World!";
In the above statement, the variable c lives in RAM because the default setting for variables is read & write access. If you specified that the variable was constant, it would live in ROM {Actually, it would represent a location in ROM.}: enter code here
char * const c = "Hello World!"; // A constant pointer that lives in ROM.
The compiler treats the literal text "Hello World!" a little more complex. The actual text lives in ROM, either in the executable area or in a data area; depends on the translator. Many compilers will allocate memory in RAM and copy the literal into RAM and make the variable c point to the copy in RAM. This is because the literal was not specified as constant.
To avoid the copying of the literal into RAM, declare the variable pointing to constant data:
const char * c = "Hello World"; // A pointer to constant data.
The definition above still allows the pointer to point to different things during execution. If you want to refer to one instance of a text literal throughout the program, declare a constant pointer to constant data:
const * char * const c = "Hello World!"; // A constant pointer to constant data
This technique allows executables to load into RAM (for faster execution) and still access read-only data from ROM (which frees up SRAM for true read/write variables).
On most PCs, everything lives either on Non-volatile memory (hard drive, BIOS, etc) or in RAM. Common method is to load programs from ROM (includes hard drive) and execute in RAM. When loading the executable into RAM, the OS usually loads the Read-Only data into RAM also. The read-only data may be guarded by the OS so an exception is generated when the application writes to this area.
It's stored in RAM.
Char pointers which are initialised with a string, like in your example are readonly.
You can cast a const variable so that you can "write" to it but the behaviour of your program will not be predictable.
Readonly regions of RAM are protected by the Operating system.
This probably varies depending on what kind of system you're on. The answer above would be for your standard PC. Embedded systems might actually write the constant data to some kind of non volatile memory.
If it helps, consider that there's two different ways in which memory can be read-only.
At the hardware level, you're referring to ROM. Once it's written to/created, the physical properties of it don't allow it's value to be changed.
At the software level, the OS (or other level higher than the user's program space) prevents the values stored in RAM from being modified.
When you're talking about read-only memory for program values, you're generally talking about the second type. The values are initialized when the program starts, and then the OS doesn't allow them to be modified.
Note: The above is an extremely simplistic explanation, but it does give the general idea.
It is stored int RAM memory. ]:>

data section in C++

I have a question to clarify my confusion about the memory organization in computer in C++.
In C++, different data is put in different location. My understanding is like this.
1) data segment section, where global and static data are located;
2) heap section, the objects created by new
3) stack section, the local variable
4) text section, the code itself.
Is that right? Is there anything I missed or did wrong?
Thanks!
I wrote an article called "C++ Internals :: Memory Layout" which will clarify this for you.
Short excerpt from the article:
.text segment
It's a Read-Only, fixed-size segment.
The text segment, a.k.a. code segment, contains executable instructions provided by the compiler and assembler.
.data segment
It's a Read-Write, fixed-size segment.
The data segment, a.k.a. initialized data segment, contains initialized:
global variables (including global static variables)
static local variables.
The segment's size depends on the size of the values in the source code, the values can be altered at run-time.
.rdata/.rodata segment
It's a Read-Only segment
The segments contains static unnamed data (like string constants)
.bss segment
It's a Read-Write and adjacent to the .data segment.
BSS segment, a.k.a. uninitialized data segment, contains statically-allocated (global and static) variables represented solely by zero-valued bits on program start. BSS stands for Block Started by Symbol, a pseudo-operation that existed in a very old assembler developed for the IBM.
heap & stack
You are quite right about those. Anyway, if you want to check some examples and get a closer look, please, refer to mentioned article.
There are typically at least two data sections. One with initialized globals, another without (BSS). A stack section isn't typically emitted in the binary.
Of course, these kind of very implementation specific questions are kinda useless if you don't specify the implementation.